PK Retake - due to noise in stands?

[LeperKhan]

Is there any legitimate explanation for this? (From a Minnesota High School playoff game)

http://www.startribune.com/stories/503/5668324.html

The Class 2A, Section 6 quarterfinal Tuesday between the two Lake Conference teams was scoreless through regulation and overtime. So the game at Johnny Cake Stadium in Apple Valley went to a shootout, in which five players from each team rotated taking penalty kicks.

"They won the shootout 4-3, but they had six shots and we had five," Scanlon said. "You better be darn sure if you give somebody an unfair advantage. [The referee] took our season away."

The referee gave Kennedy's first shooter a second penalty kick -- after he badly missed -- because of a noise in the stands on the first try, according to a report the referee filed.

"He made up a rule," Scanlon said. "There is nothing in the FIFA rulebook that applies to this."

[macheath]

Is there any legitimate explanation for this? (From a Minnesota High School playoff game)

http://www.startribune.com/stories/503/5668324.html

The Class 2A, Section 6 quarterfinal Tuesday between the two Lake Conference teams was scoreless through regulation and overtime. So the game at Johnny Cake Stadium in Apple Valley went to a shootout, in which five players from each team rotated taking penalty kicks.

"They won the shootout 4-3, but they had six shots and we had five," Scanlon said. "You better be darn sure if you give somebody an unfair advantage. [The referee] took our season away."

The referee gave Kennedy's first shooter a second penalty kick -- after he badly missed -- because of a noise in the stands on the first try, according to a report the referee filed.

"He made up a rule," Scanlon said. "There is nothing in the FIFA rulebook that applies to this."

I don't know if high school rules provide an exception like this, but under the FIFA laws, there's no provision for this. "Outside interference" in the LOTG is tied directly to physical interference. Under the LOTG, the same rules for taking a PK or justifying a retake apply to kicks from the penalty mark, with some exceptions and modifications. But all of those have to do with the sequence of shooters, who's on the pitch, etc.--none of them change the basic rules under Law 14, and there's no provision for the situation, as described. If this was actually the ref's reason, and he was operating under the FIFA LOTG, it was a mistake.

[ur_land]

To be honest, I'm not certain what the NFHS rule on this is without going back to my rulebook (which is at home), but under FIFA you could possible argue that the distracting noise was outside interference, which would necessitate a retake of the kick. Pretty big stretch, however, especially since the outside interference would have taken place before the kick had been taken.


14.7 BALL BURSTS/OUTSIDE INTERFERENCE DURING A PENALTY KICK
If, after the ball has been put into play, it is stopped or interfered with on its way to the goal by an outside agent or if it bursts on its way to the goal, the kick shall be retaken. Although the ball was put into play, the team given the penalty kick is deemed not to have had a fair opportunity to score under these circumstances. However, if the ball bursts or the interference occurs after the ball rebounds from a goalpost, crossbar, or goalkeeper or has been played legally in any other manner, the proper action is to restart with a dropped ball where the ball was when it burst or when the interference occurred.

[PirateJohn]

but under FIFA you could possible argue that the distracting noise was outside interference, which would necessitate a retake of the kick.I find this hard to believe, since these same FIFA rules dictate matches played in front of 100,000 fans. I've been to a few matches that have gone to PKs, and I don't ever recall hearing the stadium announcer saying, "please be quiet during the penalty taking."

This is football, not tennis.

[Ref Flunkie]

Also perhaps the shooter took the kick before the referee gave his signal because the shooter heard something from the stands. I can't imagine giving a rekick just because the croud is loud or something.

[intechpc]

NFHS has no provision for this either. They do for players causing such a distraction (deliberate verbal tactics) but as far as the fans there really is no such jurisdiction. Very suspect call in my opinion. I hope it was at least something very serious like an air horn or gun shot and just the right moment, at least that would lend a little credibility. However, overall I'd think the losing team has solid grounds for an appeal.

[macheath]

To be honest, I'm not certain what the NFHS rule on this is without going back to my rulebook (which is at home), but under FIFA you could possible argue that the distracting noise was outside interference, which would necessitate a retake of the kick. Pretty big stretch, however, especially since the outside interference would have taken place before the kick had been taken.

Actually, I think the helfpul section you provided from the LOTG shows that this situation isn't outside interference, which is specifically described as occuring after the kick, while the ball is on its way to the goal, and acts to directly affect the path of the ball.

Another way to think about it is whether you would retake a DFK in the field for the same situation, and on what basis. Let's say a DFK is awarded, player runs to the ball, a loud noise (car backfires or something), the player mishits the DFK. Do you retake? I assume we say "no." There's not a different standard for a PK.

[Ref Flunkie]

Actually, I think the helfpul section you provided from the LOTG shows that this situation isn't outside interference, which is specifically described as occuring after the kick, while the ball is on its way to the goal, and acts to directly affect the path of the ball.

Another way to think about it is whether you would retake a DFK in the field for the same situation, and on what basis. Let's say a DFK is awarded, player runs to the ball, a loud noise (car backfires or something), the player mishits the DFK. Do you retake? I assume we say "no." There's not a different standard for a PK.


Just to play devil's advocate, that example is a random act. Perhaps the referee thought it was a deliberate act on the part of the other team or other team's fans.

[Claymore]

I had to take a PK in college with three hundred screaming home fans behind the goal. I don't recall the ref asking anyone to be quiet.


I made it, by the way. :D

[blind_clown]

Also perhaps the shooter took the kick before the referee gave his signal because the shooter heard something from the stands. I can't imagine giving a rekick just because the croud is loud or something.

This is probably hopefully the explanation.

Maybe due to crowd noise in U-little rec...

[Gary V]

I wonder why the HS coach is appealing to the "FIFA rulebook".

The new Advice to Referees, which I haven't seen yet, evidently allows a whistle from off the field to be considered outside interference. Other than that, I'd be inclined to think that any other noise is just too bad.

I wondered once what if the HS Pep Band showed up at a soccer game. Would they be allowed to play music during the run of play? Or would they have to wait for breaks in the action as they do in pointyball?

[colins1993]

HS soccer is in its own world.

Remember the AD is a super power at HS athletic events.

I do know if there is vulgarity being shouted by the students the AD can intervene and correct it.

I ask myself daily this time of year - "Why do I ref HS?"??????????

[Chubbywubby]

Same reason we do the u-littles: to collect funny anecdotes. Last night, on his side's first throwin, the HS coach asked me for a timeout. A couple of his own players laughed at him too.

[macheath]

Just to play devil's advocate, that example is a random act. Perhaps the referee thought it was a deliberate act on the part of the other team or other team's fans.

OK, Mr. Devil...:) I'll take the side of the uptight, rulebook citing angels. If it was the other team's fans, doesn't change the equation or what we're allowed to consider, unfortunately for the kicker. :( If it was the other team's players, we'd have to analzye if it was from active players or substitutes on the bench or team personnel like coaches, etc. (and we probably wouldn't know, as we were correctly watching the PK take place). But still not "outside interference" as the LOTG gives it to us, so it wouldn't affect the PK itself.

[macheath]

(snip)...The new Advice to Referees, which I haven't seen yet, evidently allows a whistle from off the field to be considered outside interference. Other than that, I'd be inclined to think that any other noise is just too bad. (snip)...

Has anyone seen the new Advice, and if so, can this issue be cited/posted? USSF is apparently selling the new one to us, unlike previous years when it was available for free. Maybe they'll give it at the next recert...The old versions, of course, did not allow for a whistle from an adjacent field or the stands to qualify as outside interference.

[njref]

While standard crowd noise shouldn't be grounds for a retake, some exceptional noise might, for example, a gunshot, whistle, explosion, or outrageous insult, where the noise was intended to distract the player (hey, I'm from NJ, where anything could happen). I would argue that the noise does not have to qualify as outside interference; if the referee on hearing the noise decides he needs to stop play to deal with it, then the kick needs to be retaken even if the whistle was not blown before the shot. Seems like a fair way to deal with unfair conduct.

[macheath]

While standard crowd noise shouldn't be grounds for a retake, some exceptional noise might, for example, a gunshot, whistle, explosion, or outrageous insult, where the noise was intended to distract the player (hey, I'm from NJ, where anything could happen). I would argue that the noise does not have to qualify as outside interference; if the referee on hearing the noise decides he needs to stop play to deal with it, then the kick needs to be retaken even if the whistle was not blown before the shot. Seems like a fair way to deal with unfair conduct.

Here, when you say "whistle was not blown before the shot," you mean a whistle other than the referee's, right? Obviously, the referee's whistle needs to be blown before the shot; if the shot is taken before the ref's whistle is blown, just retake the kick, no problem.

On an "outside" whistle, afraid I have to disagree. The old Advice says, explicitly:

"9.2 PLAY THE REFEREE's WHISTLE. The Laws of the Game were not written to compensate for the mistakes of players. If a spectator blows a whistle and
any player, thinking it was the referee, then illegally handles the ball, the referee could award a direct free kick (or penalty kick) to the opposing team. The same would be true if the player reacted to a referee's whistle from an adjacent field..."

But in reality, we're talking about a very short time that the scenario could occur. If the outside noise takes place before the referee's whistle to start the penalty kick, no problem--whistle hasn't blown, so if the kicker kicks it, simply retake. This would have to take place after the ref's whistle had blown, but before or just as the kicker contacts the ball. Not a lot of time there.

[njref]

Here, when you say "whistle was not blown before the shot," you mean a whistle other than the referee's, right? Obviously, the referee's whistle needs to be blown before the shot; if the shot is taken before the ref's whistle is blown, just retake the kick, no problem.

On an "outside" whistle, afraid I have to disagree. The old Advice says, explicitly:

"9.2 PLAY THE REFEREE's WHISTLE. The Laws of the Game were not written to compensate for the mistakes of players. If a spectator blows a whistle and
any player, thinking it was the referee, then illegally handles the ball, the referee could award a direct free kick (or penalty kick) to the opposing team. The same would be true if the player reacted to a referee's whistle from an adjacent field..."

But in reality, we're talking about a very short time that the scenario could occur. If the outside noise takes place before the referee's whistle to start the penalty kick, no problem--whistle hasn't blown, so if the kicker kicks it, simply retake. This would have to take place after the ref's whistle had blown, but before or just as the kicker contacts the ball. Not a lot of time there.

You make some good points. It seems to me, however, that the USSF advice is focused at the normal situation of an accidental whistle conflict or a whistle from the stands.

It is interesting that the Advice states the referee "could" award a DFK rather than "must". In the normal scenario where it is the player's error, I would be inclined to do so, but in a competitive youth game where the spectator was trying to induce handling or distract a player in a PK, I might be inclined not to reward such blatent unsporting behavior. Fortunately I have never seen that, but it isn't so far-fetched that I couldn't imagine it.

Focusing on the original thread, my point was that I think spectator misbehavior (not mere "crowd noise") could be grounds for a PK re-take even short of physically interfering with play, but it would have to be pretty bad. But if that is wrong, let me know, I am happy to have learning experiences that do not involve me blowing a call on the field first!

[superkeeper]

Same reason we do the u-littles: to collect funny anecdotes. Last night, on his side's first throwin, the HS coach asked me for a timeout. A couple of his own players laughed at him too.


You laugh at this but here in MA we have timeouts in HS soccer. One each half

[david58]

On an "outside" whistle, afraid I have to disagree. The old Advice says, explicitly:

"9.2 PLAY THE REFEREE's WHISTLE. The Laws of the Game were not written to compensate for the mistakes of players. If a spectator blows a whistle and
any player, thinking it was the referee, then illegally handles the ball, the referee could award a direct free kick (or penalty kick) to the opposing team. The same would be true if the player reacted to a referee's whistle from an adjacent field..."



Thou shouldst readest the new version of the Advice for Referees. ;)

9.2 NOW tells us to treat it as outside interference.

Worth the $4.95 for the "new" book, even if philosophically I HATE paying money for it.