The ATR and Striking [Archive]

View Full Version : The ATR and Striking

PVancouver

25 Jun 2008, 01:58 PM

I have a couple of nit-picky beefs with the ATR regarding striking:

ATR: 12.6 STRIKING
Striking can be performed by direct contact using hands, arms, elbows, head, or knees, or by throwing any object (including the ball). Striking as a foul occurs where contact is made with the opponent or where contact would have been made if the attempt to strike is unsuccessful. It is this location that determines the correct restart (direct free kick, penalty kick, indirect free kick, or dropped ball).

NOTE: While indirect free kicks and dropped balls are restarts, they would never be applied to a striking foul.

A player inside his or her own penalty area who reaches outside the area to strike an opponent or who throws an object other than the ball at an opponent who is located outside the penalty area has committed this offense at the location of the opponent. The restart would be a direct free kick if the striking occurred during play and both persons were on the field. If the opponent who was the target of the striking action had been inside the penalty area of the player doing the striking, the restart would be a penalty kick even if the player doing the striking had been outside the penalty area.

If the player’s action was not a foul—because the target of the striking was off the field at the time or the target of the action was not an opponent—the misconduct (violent conduct) would be punished by an indirect free kick where the player committing the striking was located.

CONFLICT: If play was stopped for the misconduct, shouldn’t the restart be a dropped ball where the ball was when play was stopped? How does “where the infringement occurred” magically move from one place (off the field) to another place (on the field)?

The ATR notes “If the action originated off the field entirely (whether by a player or a substitute), the restart is a dropped ball where the ball was when play was stopped (subject to the special terms of Law 8).”

ATR 12.25 RESTARTS FOR MISCONDUCT notes that “If play is stopped solely to deal with misconduct committed off the field of play, the restart is a dropped ball taken from where the ball was when play was stopped”. The Laws of the Game are appallingly silent on this subject. According to the LOTG, “An indirect free kick is also awarded to the opposing team if a player, in the opinion of the referee: commits any other offence, not previously mentioned in Law 12, for which play is stopped to caution or dismiss a player. The indirect free kick is taken from where the offence occurred. * (see page 3)”

Since the offence occurred off the field of play, a dropped ball must be used:

“A dropped ball is a way of restarting the match after a temporary stoppage that becomes necessary, while the ball is in play, for any reason not mentioned elsewhere in the Laws of the Game.”

Why not include the possibility of a dropped ball, for misconduct occurring off the field of play while the ball is in play, directly in Law 12? Oh, that's right, Law 12 never mentions that the ball might not actually be in play or that anything might actually take place off the field of play. Nevermind.

The logic currently used here for a dropped ball restart should also be used to allow offside to be called in the case of an offside-positioned but off-the-field attacker who becomes involved in play, but I digress.

campbed

25 Jun 2008, 08:54 PM

Nit-picky redux...

Point 1: Should we be being nit-picky about an out of date document and advice? You are referring to the 2007 ATR, not the current 2008 ATR. Is this relevant?

NOTE: While indirect free kicks and dropped balls are restarts, they would never be applied to a striking foul.

Point 2: Would it not be true, that the restart for striking off the FOP (misconduct) and the referee stops play, is a drop ball?

Reference for Point 2 #1: (from the same page you quote) 2007 ATR, page 41, Law 12.6 Striking:
If the action originated off the field entirely (whether by a player or a substitute), the restart is a dropped ball where the ball was when play was stopped (subject to the special terms of Law 8).

Reference for Point 2 #2: USSF Additional Instructions to Referees 2008, Page 17 on Law 12:
If the referee stops play due to an offense committed outside the field of play (when the ball is in play), play shall be restarted with a dropped ball in the position where the ball was located. *(see page 3)

campbed

25 Jun 2008, 09:20 PM

Assuming we now agree from my previous post, that we are referring to the current law and advice from 2008...

CONFLICT: If play was stopped for the misconduct, shouldn’t the restart be a dropped ball where the ball was when play was stopped? How does “where the infringement occurred” magically move from one place (off the field) to another place (on the field)?

To me it seems wholly reasonable for the players committee (who determine how THEY want the game played) when presented an opportunity to select the worse punishment for the offending team, to do so. Where is the conflict? I have one offender on FOP, victim off FOP. It punishes the offending team more to move the infringement onto the FOP (foul vs misconduct) (indirect FK vs drop ball). In this case they have a choice that can be made vs both-on or both-off. Select maximum punishment when given a choice. Simple it seems.

PVancouver

25 Jun 2008, 10:31 PM

Point 1: Should we be being nit-picky about an out of date document and advice? You are referring to the 2007 ATR, not the current 2008 ATR. Is this relevant?

What I call the 2007 ATR is more technically called the 2007/2008 ATR. It is the most current available, at least on-line. Others may refer to it as the 2008 ATR. There is probably a conventional rule for these types of things but I don't know the convention.

Striking as a foul occurs where contact is made with the opponent or where contact would have been made if the attempt to strike is unsuccessful. It is this location that determines the correct restart (direct free kick, penalty kick, indirect free kick, or dropped ball).

NOTE: While indirect free kicks and dropped balls are restarts, they would never be applied to a striking foul.

Point 2: Would it not be true, that the restart for striking off the FOP (misconduct) and the referee stops play, is a drop ball?

If the ball were in play at the time, I would say yes. But the ATR says it might be an indirect free kick on the field of play, if a player on the field threw an object and it hit, or could have hit, an opponent or any other person off the field. The restart would take place where the player who threw the object was. However, neither an indirect free kick or dropped ball restart would be for a foul, as these are always direct kicks or PKs. The restart would be for misconduct.

"If the action originated off the field entirely (whether by a player or a substitute), the restart is a dropped ball where the ball was when play was stopped (subject to the special terms of Law 8)."

Again, this would be for misconduct, not a foul.

To me it seems wholly reasonable for the players committee (who determine how THEY want the game played) when presented an opportunity to select the worse punishment for the offending team, to do so.

The players committee? What is this?

campbed

25 Jun 2008, 11:38 PM

refereejoe

26 Jun 2008, 01:05 AM

PVancouver

26 Jun 2008, 07:46 AM

Any offense described under Law 12 punishable by an indirect free kick is now known as an "indirect free kick foul," as opposed to their "direct free kick foul" counterpart. So, technically, you now can have a foul punishable by an indirect free kick.

True. I should have limiited my statement to direct kick fouls, not fouls in general. Striking is a direct kick foul.

The wording of the ATR is fine.

12.1 WHAT IS A FOUL?
A foul is an unfair or unsafe action committed (1) by a player, (2) against an opponent or the opposing team, (3) on the field of play, (4) while the ball is in play.

I'm still a little unclear on how the wording of the ATR is fine.

Rufusabc

26 Jun 2008, 08:52 AM

We gots to get you another hobby....

DerbyRam54

26 Jun 2008, 09:31 AM

More precisely than players committee: INTERNATIONAL FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION BOARD (IFAB)

Good overviews here:
http://ssbra.org/html/laws/ifab.html

You can find IFAB minutes and law of the game archives here all the way back to 1886!

And here...
http://www.drblank.com/slaw21.htm

4 delegates(votes) each from:
England FA
Ireland FA
Wales FA
Scotland FA
FIFA

Players via these delegates make the LOTG. If players want a change, and there are 3/4 of the votes of the 20 delegates, then new/changed law is born.

In our case, the law is passed to FIFA to be published and interpreted. It is then passed on to the referee to apply and enforce.

So, players elect via their FA delegate to the IFAB, the players create/change the LOTG via their votes at the IFAB, and then the players live and play by those laws, and referees apply those laws on the players behalf.

Anything beyond this summary is speculation on my part, and over my pay grade.

Ugh! I'm now tired and going to bed.

I still stand by my original conclusion. There is not conflict, the law is this way because that is how the players (IFAB) want it.

I don't think these days that the players have anything much to do with it. As with most bureaucracies there's a lot of turf wars, vested interests and so on. By the time you get to selecting delegates to IFAB, I doubt there was much player input.

The one thing IFAB isn't is a committee of lawyers, so the wording of some of their decisions will, for those who have to parse every word, perhaps raise more questions than are answered.

One thing that is interesting is the historic variations in the rate of change. There have been periods (the 50s for instance) where very little changed, and then periods (recent time) when they couldn't leave things alone. We had a major rewrite of the LOTG in the 30s (the Rous revision), that sufficed till the 90s, now apparently we're doing it again.

Maybe they follow this board too closely and are really concerned about PVancouver's need for clarity... :D

PVancouver

26 Jun 2008, 10:34 AM

If the player’s action was not a foul—because the target of the striking was off the field at the time or the target of the action was not an opponent—the misconduct (violent conduct) would be punished by an indirect free kick where the player committing the striking was located.

There is more clarity in the Laws/AI than I previously realized:

• If a player standing inside the field of play throws an object at any
person standing outside the field of play, the referee restarts play
with an indirect free kick taken from the position in which the ball
was located when play was stopped * (see page 3)

While the ATR insists that striking must be punished as Violent Conduct, the LOTG/AI clearly indicates it should only be punished for VC only if excessive force is used. The penalty for throwing from the field off the field (misconduct) agrees with that for any other type of misconduct where a player "leaves the field of play" to commit the misconduct:

Restart of play:
• If the ball is out of play, play is restarted according to the previous
decision.
• If the ball is in play and the offence occurred outside the field of
play
– if the player is already off the field of play and commits the offence
play is restarted with a dropped ball* from the position in which
the ball was located when play was stopped. *
– if the player leaves the field of play to commit the offence, play is
restarted with an indirect free kick from the position in which the
ball was located when play was stopped. *

I need to think about this some more.

PVancouver

26 Jun 2008, 11:32 AM

I've thought about it a little more, and I am struggling to understand what:

"if the player leaves the field of play to commit the offence, play is restarted with an indirect free kick from the position in which the ball was located when play was stopped. *"

means.

On the other hand, I don't know why there would ever be a need to restart play with a dropped ball when a perpetrator has clearly been identified who is a member of one team or the other:

"if the player is already off the field of play and commits the offence play is restarted with a dropped ball* from the position in which the ball was located when play was stopped. *"

"Basis [Basic?] requirements for a foul
....
If the referee stops play due to an offence committed outside the field of play (when the ball is in play), play shall be restarted with a dropped ball in the position where the ball was located. * (see page 3)"

In the latter case, is this because there was no foul, so the whistle was in error?

Perhaps restarting play for off-the-field fouls with indirect free kicks at the location of the bal when the foul occurred would not be a bad idea (assuming the ball was still in play).

campbed

26 Jun 2008, 12:03 PM

What I call the 2007 ATR is more technically called the 2007/2008 ATR. It is the most current available, at least on-line. Others may refer to it as the 2008 ATR. There is probably a conventional rule for these types of things but I don't know the convention.

Ok, I didn't post the on-line version for 2008 because I thought I might get in trouble. So I'll post a link to the referee board post that has the link to it. So go to this post and the link to the 2008 Additional Instructions and Guidelines to Referees and Assistant Referees is in the first post.

http://refereeforum.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=19000092&hl=Additional+Instructions

This is current law, and superceeds the 2007 ATR.

PVancouver

26 Jun 2008, 12:24 PM

This is based on FIFA LOTG 2007/2008. For 2008/2009, the Additional Instructions will get a new name.

Wreave

26 Jun 2008, 02:32 PM

This is current law, and supercedes the 2007 ATR.

This isn't an ATR. It's "Additional Instructions and Guidelines...".

This document replaces the Instructions for Referees and Resolutions Affecting Team Coaches and Players, formerly issued for Regional and National Cup Competitions and Tournaments. It will be updated annually to reflect changes in the Laws of the Game and memoranda, circulars, or positions papers issued by FIFA and the U. S. Soccer Federation. The information is taken from the Additional Instructions and Guidelines for Referees and Assistant Referees published in the FIFA edition of the Laws of the Game.

The 2007 ATR is still the current ATR. That it's listed at the #1 item on this page should speak to its importance and currency:

http://ussoccer.com/laws/index.jsp.html

It's interesting that the AIG is not linked on this page. The 2005 and 2006 ones are up, but nothing more recent.

campbed

26 Jun 2008, 04:28 PM

Wreave

26 Jun 2008, 05:08 PM

Yikes! Thanks Wreave, I was told differently, and that in 2008, ATR concept was retired, and moved to a document that you could only buy hard copy from USSF.

So I should ignore this 2008 AIG document (unless I'm at Nationals/Regionals).

I don't know when you should ignore it per se, but the ATR is definitely still active, and the 2008 one will be released soon. If you check out the answer to the PK in extended time question on http://www.askasoccerreferee.com/, Jim notes that.

Gary V

26 Jun 2008, 06:41 PM

Yikes! Thanks Wreave, I was told differently, and that in 2008, ATR concept was retired, and moved to a document that you could only buy hard copy from USSF. Advice was always available online; it just was protected so it couldn't be printed or cut-n-pasted. If you wanted a hard copy, you had to pay for it.

So I should ignore this 2008 AIG document (unless I'm at Nationals/Regionals).Absolutely not! AIG was published in the 2007-8 Laws of the Game from FIFA a year ago. It replaced the FIFA Q&A, which was last issued in 2006. USSF chose to not publish it, as they never published Q&A either. I'm not sure what prompted USSF to release the AIG with their comments, only a short time before the next version of the Laws was to be released. Incidentally, FIFA is replacing AIG with a new section in the 2008-9 Laws, entitled "INTERPRETATION OF THE LAWS OF THE GAME AND GUIDELINES FOR REFEREES".

PVancouver

26 Jun 2008, 08:12 PM

The penalty for throwing from the field off the field (misconduct) agrees with that for any other type of misconduct where a player "leaves the field of play" to commit the misconduct:

Actually, the restarts in the LOTG AI I referred to here apply only to violent conduct, which is how I originally understood it and then thought "better" :( .

Restarts for unsporting behavior occurring off the field of play while the ball is in play are indirect free kicks for the opponent from the spot where the ball was located.

PVancouver

26 Jun 2008, 08:27 PM

The ATR notes “If the action originated off the field entirely (whether by a player or a substitute), the restart is a dropped ball where the ball was when play was stopped (subject to the special terms of Law 8).”

I should note this is a special case noted in the LOTG/AI and is in complete agreement. Although I don't understand the need for this special case.

ATR 12.25 RESTARTS FOR MISCONDUCT notes that “If play is stopped solely to deal with misconduct committed off the field of play, the restart is a dropped ball taken from where the ball was when play was stopped”. The Laws of the Game are appallingly silent on this subject.

Sorry. I accidently quoted the 2005 ATR (which I can copy), and forgot to check it against the 2007 ATR. The 2007 ATR declares that the proper restart is an indirect free kick from where the ball was when play was stopped.

PVancouver

26 Jun 2008, 08:59 PM

Sorry. I accidently quoted the 2005 ATR (which I can copy), and forgot to check it against the 2007 ATR. The 2007 ATR declares that the proper restart is an indirect free kick from where the ball was when play was stopped.

Sadly, I think the 2005 ATR had it right. The restart IS a dropped ball, although I would PREFER an indirect free kick (and other possibilities).