You make the call - Dropped Pants

[Sport Billy]

What do you call?

Photo:
http://img.iht.com/images/2008/11/17/socitaly17.jpg

Description:
Catania's forward Gianvito Plasmati, right, is seen with his shorts down as his teammate Giuseppe Mascara, not pictured, scored a goal during the Italian Serie A match between Catania and Torino, in Catania, on Sunday. Three Catania players dropped their shorts down near their knees so Torino goalkeeper Matteo Sereni couldn't see Mascara's kick. Catania won Sunday match 3-2.

The goal stood. This has to be "unsporting behavior" doesn't it?
DTR possibly?

I don't know, but some one is getting carded if I'm reffing.

[o5iiawah]

Since an illegal act occurred on the part of the attacking team, the 4th condition of a legal goal was not satisfied. I'd card the players after play was stopped and restart with a goal kick.

[Sport Billy]

Since an illegal act occurred on the part of the attacking team, the 4th condition of a legal goal was not satisfied. I'd card the players after play was stopped and restart with a goal kick.

But that's my question. Obviously, Andrea Gervasoni, the official incharge of that game, did not believe that there was an infraction. Which law did they infract?

No way this goal stands in my book, but what do you call it?

[saabrian]

How is that different than the attacking team, say, setting up a wall at the front post to screen the keeper?

[Sport Billy]

How is that different than the attacking team, say, setting up a wall at the front post to screen the keeper?

Well for one, they usually keep their shorts on. ;)

[IASocFan]

Unsporting Behaviour is always an option and always in the ITOOR! The referee could have carded for USB and retaken the kick. I see no justification for any other call. If not USB in the opinion of the CR, it's a goal and a Kickoff.

[o5iiawah]

But that's my question. Obviously, Andrea Gervasoni, the official incharge of that game, did not believe that there was an infraction. Which law did they infract?

No way this goal stands in my book, but what do you call it?

I would apply law5 to Law 4, saying that the referee has the power to stop the match for any infringment of the law and clearly, the player's equipment does not meet the requirement of law4. Even though Law4 states that the match need not be stopped for an equipment violation, I think given the circumstance you could declare that the violation of law4 contributed to an illegal goal.

[IASocFan]

How is that different than the attacking team, say, setting up a wall at the front post to screen the keeper?

They can legally do that, but if you move your defenders up, they're interfering play and will be offside. Or they could be impeding the keeper.

[Wahoos1]

So lets ask it this way. If this happens anywhere but Italy does the ref stand for it. I can just see the German or english refs going nuts.

[IASocFan]

So lets ask it this way. If this happens anywhere but Italy does the ref stand for it. I can just see the German or english refs going nuts.

German and English refs don't go nuts. They calmly handle any situation and proceed with the game. Or terminate the game and leave the field if they feel threatened. :cool:

[USSF REF]

THe minute I see undies, someone is getting booked.

I am sure we will now have the IFAB come out with a ruling that says, "The players shorts must be worn around the waist as intended. Under penalty of caution."

The referee should have dealt with it... but he didn't.

Now if FIFA had only approved that one-piece uniform.... :rolleyes:

[MassachusettsRef]

Unsporting Behaviour is always an option and always in the ITOOR! The referee could have carded for USB and retaken the kick. I see no justification for any other call. If not USB in the opinion of the CR, it's a goal and a Kickoff.I think what's being said--or implied here--is key.

The players pulled their shorts down before the kick was taken, right? So if the infringement is pulling the shorts down (a Law IV UB infringement) then it occurred before play was restarted, and you have to allow the kick to be retaken. Quite frankly, I think this is the just decision that will be most accepted by all.

A more punitive referee might argue the UB is simply in the distraction of the goalkeeper, and therefore occurred during dynamic play. In this case, you restart with the IFK coming out. I think this is the much more difficult of the two calls to sell, though, and not worth the trouble. Pick a player (the first one you saw that isn't already on a caution), book him, and have the free kick retaken.

[MassachusettsRef]

Even though Law4 states that the match need not be stopped for an equipment violation, I think given the circumstance you could declare that the violation of law4 contributed to an illegal goal.I probably should have quoted this post, too. You're right that Law IV doesn't say that. But if the shorts are being pulled down before the kick is taken, then you're not stopping play for the violation. You're simply not allowing it to restart. In point of fact, this could actually be your way out of a caution (if you so chose). Instruct the player to leave the field until his equipment is fixed (in lieu of the caution), restart with the free kick, let the player back on after play restarts. Problem solved without a caution (again, if you so chose--I'm inclined to want to give the caution anyway, but my eagerness to give non-violent cautions always depends on the overall circumstances and atmosphere of the game).

[Sport Billy]

I think what's being said--or implied here--is key.

The players pulled their shorts down before the kick was taken, right? So if the infringement is pulling the shorts down (a Law IV UB infringement) then it occurred before play was restarted, and you have to allow the kick to be retaken. Quite frankly, I think this is the just decision that will be most accepted by all.

A more punitive referee might argue the UB is simply in the distraction of the goalkeeper, and therefore occurred during dynamic play. In this case, you restart with the IFK coming out. I think this is the much more difficult of the two calls to sell, though, and not worth the trouble. Pick a player (the first one you saw that isn't already on a caution), book him, and have the free kick retaken.

I think I agree with all of that (I'm not certain it is a Law 4 violation, however), but why not book all three?

[USSF REF]

Just book one, if you're going to... it serves the purpose of protecting the spirit of the game, and punishing the stupid behavior, and preventing further such occurences. Book all three and you're going to have a hard time of it for the rest of the game, sometimes, control and management suffer when you are too zealous with cards.

[boylanj64]

This is a quote from former Italian referee coordinator Paolo Casarin regarding the tactic: "It is unsportsmanlike and in bad taste. It's a trick that should not be tolerated anymore by the referees."

I think it is fairly obvious any players who remove their shorts are committing unsportsmanlike conduct, and should be cautioned. In this case the reason would be that their behavior "brings the game in to disrepute."

The other important question would be how you treat the restart. The tactic, as I understand it, is done at roughly the same moment as the taking of the kick, so I see three options:

1) Decide it occurred before the kick, caution and retake
2) Determine it came during dynamic play, halt play, and restart with an IDK for the defense
3) Determine it is a technical infringement but not a penal offense, and can wait until the next restart to address with a YC

Which of thse would you go with, and why?

[refmedic]

If this Italian referee wanted to make sure that this never happened again, in the world, he would have sent all of them off for abusive, insulting, and/or offensive language or GESTURES. Of course, he would have needed security to get off of the field, but I think he would have been justified in doing so. It will be interesting to see what Serie A and/or FIFA/IFAB do retroactively about this.

As for the restart, let the kick proceed and then stop play to issue the misconduct. If you are still alove after the dust clears and there are still enough players to continue, IFK coming out for the defending team.

[Sport Billy]

Just book one, if you're going to... it serves the purpose of protecting the spirit of the game, and punishing the stupid behavior, and preventing further such occurences. Book all three and you're going to have a hard time of it for the rest of the game, sometimes, control and management suffer when you are too zealous with cards.

So just the guy who actually has his underwear showing (Plasmati).
You know what they say, "you don't wear black underware unless you want someone to see it." :p

[DadOf6]

What do you call?

Point at the pretty black briefs, giggle, wink, and blow him a kiss.

[dadcoachref]

law 4 only states the player must have shorts, does not say where they have to be...

:p

seriously, where is the infraction? it is certainly unusual, but illegal? I would think you should ask the players to pull their shorts up before the kick takes place and attempt to avoid the issue...

???