I just got recertified as a HS referee this year. Last year - my first - I did a grand total of one game by myself. It was a freshman game. As I'm re-reading the rules book, I'm just utterly amazed at why anyone would do high school games. The section for substitution is 4.5 pages! I do have a question though. On p. 39, it reads: "A goal MAY be scored directly from a: ... g. goalkeeper's throw, punt or drop-kick." Somehow that didn't grab my attention last year, but it sure stopped me in my tracks. Is this also true for FIFA/LOTG? Anyway, I needed to vent. I will now attempt to duplicate my efforts from last year.
quick answer - yes. law 10 states that a goal is scored when the whole of the ball crosses over the goal line, between...under..., provided no infringement of the lotg has been committed previously (an infringement that is called immediately prior to the ball crossing) by the team scoring the goal. the keeper may handle the ball in his/her own pa. a throw is a valid play of the ball by the keeper (from own pa). the laws do not list any prohibition to scoring from the keeper's throw.
In a very windy Morgan Hill, CA about 4 years ago, I witnessed a goalkeeper score a goal from within his own PA. The wind was in his favor, the ball rolling towards him fairly quickly with an attacker trying to keep up. The keeper gets to the ball and absolutely blasts it, sending it over the heads of all on the field. The wind carries it just enough to go over the head of the opposing keeper, who had moved up to the top of the 18, and into the net. I never thought I would see a goalkeeper chip a goalkeeper from his own PA
In our rec league, we had a keeper in the U12 division who could just crush the ball on his punts. Without wind, on the smaller u12 field he could kick it out over the opponents goal line on a single bounce. Never saw him make a goal that way but he sure came close a couple times with the ball bouncing just over the crossbar.
You (we all) need to understand that HS soccer is governed by the NFHS and by people who are educators and for the most part, do not understand the game. I know, a harsh statement, but consider what is stressed on the exam..... The NFHS test has nearly TWICE as many quesions on Players Equipment (Rule 4) as it does for Fouls and Misconduct (Rule 12). There are more questions on Rule 3 than Rule 12!
I think NFHS administrators understand the game to some respect, but you (we all) need to understand they also have to protect the school system from liability as much as they can. The school does not want to incur the risk of litigation from the opinion of the referee. Thus, they take as much subjectivity out of decisions not related to the action of the game itself. Especially when it come to player safety, which translates into player equipment. If a player is seriously injured from foul play, and the school is sued for not protecting the players adequately, how do you think the court might rule based on what "the referee deems safe?" Nobody knows -- it could go either way on any given day. Instead of leaving that question mark in the air, NFHS comes up with rules that specifically define the player's equipment, require that the coaches (contracted employees) enfore the rule, and stress that the referees also understand what constitutes safe equipment. NFHS and USSF are two completely different beasts when the law is involved; schools have a much higher risk of being sued. The laws vs. the rules illustrate this difference. It has nothing to do with how well administrators understand soccer. It has everything to do with how well they understand being served.
Nonsense...it has little to nothing with the legal system. People can sue anyone, anywhere, anytime be it NFHS or USSF or whatever A plethora of rules will not protect anyone from a lawsuit. NFHS is a dinosaur....they are more concerned about the predominate color of sweatbands...or if socks have stripes and other nonsense. That is why there are so many silly questions on the exam (my opinion) Think about it fellas......If it really was about keeping players "safe" and protection from "lawsuits" they would focus more on fouls and misconduct than the size of the numbers on jerseys and if there is more than one logo on socks. Jeepers!
Well, I don't know your personal involvement with NFHS administration YellowShirt. However, I do happen to know a few people that are, and all have stated the rules came about from a variety of court rulings and concern for potential litigation in the future. Of course, this isn't the sole reason, but it is a very major one. There are already laws and judicial precedence preventing injured players from suing if the injury came about from the "natural" participation in the sport. Athletes and spectators both legally accept the risks involved by the decision to be a part in the first place. However, there is merit to some claims that a player would not have suffered injury had he or she been properly equipped. In school sports, it is the responsibilty of the school to ensure that the student athletes are properly equipped. Thus, NFHS has to define what that means. You are entitled to your opinion, of course, but this certainly is not "Nonsense." Keeping an open mind is a good characteristic for referees to develop as well.
Refjoe...I have no problem with wanting to ensure players are safe. Part of this is of course seeing to it that players are properly equipped...but read the questions on the exam...they deal with logos on socks, two questions regarding the size of the numbers on jerseys...color of compression shorts....if you want to be concerned about safe equipment, safety of the players and liability then ask the proper questions. Has a player ever been injured because of the extra logo on his sock....or the number on the jersey was too big.....or his compression shorts were not the predominate color of the shorts? Think about the games you have done....when was a player injured soley due to "equipment"....and when do players get injured because the referee does not know how to recognize a foul? My point is, in my opinion, the NFHS puts too much emphais on the administrative rules and far too little Fouls and Misconduct. Again, just my opinion...what do I know?
Well, you've mentioned the cosmetic uniform questions a few times, but I've not seen anything like this on the test. Some are an adoption from the NCAA rules, some are there to prevent advertising, and others are a bit silly. However, I've simply not seen an obsession with quizzing referees on these issues to the level you describe. As far as your point on fouls -- referees cannot prevent a player from being injured from a foul. We can train to recognize fouls when they occur, and in calling the game fairly we try to prevent emotions from taking over mutual respect, but we cannot react to something before it occurs. If a player commits a foul that injures an opponent we can punish accordingly, but not rewind time. And I've seen a couple of broken ankles or injured ligaments from improper shinguards. I've also seen a plastic brace give a player a broken wrist. A couple of months ago I received a nasty cut on my neck from a player's wedding ring. I've also heard from another referee that a player received a broken finger from the wristband on an opponent that he didn't catch. If improper player equipment didn't create safety problems, we wouldn't need to worry about "improper equipment" in the first place.
Yes. Except if that throw is also a throw-in. The goalkeeper playing legally may throw the ball from within his penalty area. If that ball happens to travel the length of the field and meet the requirements of rule 10 for a goal to be scored, then count it.
Hey Joe....here on the questions from the 2006-2007 NFHS SOccer Rules Exam....available on many associations website as the refresher test. Not sure what tests you are looking at but this is NFHS 21. [FONT=_sans]During the pregame inspection, it is discovered that all members of one team are wearing illegal jerseys. The referee terminates the game. This is correct procedure.[/FONT] 22. [FONT=_sans]Team A's players have a manufacturer's logo on both sides of each stocking. This is illegal.[/FONT] 23. [FONT=_sans]The numbers on Team B's jerseys are not clearly visible. Team B has no other jerseys. The game shall be played and the referee shall notify the state association. This is correct procedure.[/FONT] 24. [FONT=_sans]All players from Team A are dressed in jerseys with numbers three inches high on the back. Since the coach cannot produce a state association waiver, the referee cancels the contest.[/FONT] 25. [FONT=_sans]Team B players have only 6-inch numbers on the back of their jerseys. The referee informs Team B's coach that his team's uniforms are illegal and reports this to the proper authority.[/FONT] 26. A player on Team A is wearing baseball spikes when the referee inspects the team. The referee considers them unsafe. In order to play, the player must replace them and report back for re-inspection. 27. [FONT=_sans]The home team A begins the game with all players wearing black compression shorts. This is not legal.[/FONT] 28. [FONT=_sans]The Team A jerseys have a legal-sized manufacturers logo on the left sleeve and Power Brand on the right one. The referee allows the players to play, but files a report to the state for teams illegal jerseys. This is correct procedure.[/FONT] 29. [FONT=_sans]Player A4 is wearing a manufacturer's sleeve over a knee brace. This is legal.[/FONT] 30. [FONT=_sans]Head, arm, thigh or hip pads containing sole leather, fiber, metal or any other unyielding materials are illegal unless covered with soft padding. [/FONT] 31. [FONT=_sans]Player B is wearing a hard cast on her arm. The head referee determines that the cast is properly padded and, since the coach gives verbal assurance that her physician had given her permission to play, the referee may allow her to participate.[/FONT] 32. [FONT=_sans]Player A is wearing a medical-alert medal taped to her body with the emergency data visible. This is permitted by the rules.[/FONT] 33. [FONT=_sans]Player A is wearing a protective face mask and presents the referee a medical release from his MD/DO. The referee notices that the mask is molded to the face and is not dangerous to other players. He permits Player A to wear the mask.[/FONT] 34. [FONT=_sans]It is the responsibility of the coach and referee to see that all players are legally equipped.[/FONT] 35. [FONT=_sans]Before the game begins, the head referee verifies with each coach that his/her players are legally equipped for the game.[/FONT] 36. [FONT=_sans]While inspecting the Team B equipment just prior to the start of play, B2 is verbally abusive to the official. The official cannot caution or disqualify B2 until the game has officially begun. [/FONT] End of discussion.
Well, you post here 5 questions that are a bit picky over cosmetic issues, out of 16. The rest have to do with proper equipment, player safety, the authority of the referee, and procedures. As I have acknowledged, there are indeed a few that are a bit finicky, but not to what I consider the level you have described. Certainly not enough to justify stating that NFHS cares more about cosmetics than they do player safety and litigation. Tact is also a good characteristic for a referee to develop.
Sorry, I don't take too kindly to people calling accurate posts "nonsense," proceeding to make outlandish and unsupported claims of their own, and then finish by saying "end of discussion" after providing very little relevant evidence to strengthen their position. Along that same line, why are you replying at all? Do you disagree with any of the points I've made?
Well, I do believe that Yellowshirt has a valid point. There need to be more questions about fouls and misconduct, less administrative. Also, abandon the T/F questions. Multiple choice is better than T/F. There used to be a ridiculous question about smoking on the test. They finally dropped it, but it was there for many years. Most referees I know would rather have their nails pulled out then referee high school. The common complaint I hear, "I hate high school rules." One thing that bothers me is the changes made to fit our American sense of "fair play." My favorite is the throw-in that never enters the field is awarded to an opponent. FIFA, in my opinion, has the correct interpretation since the ball is not back in play. I remember one time discussing this with a friend who is a coach and he said, "Well, it's not fair to my team if they don't do it right. It should go to my team." My argument back to him was that if a goal kick didn't leave the penalty area, that ball is not in play. So based on NFHS' logic, that kick should be awarded to the opposing team, but it isn't. I've also seen some pretty nitpicky refereeing in high school contests. And it's mostly been administrative stuff, not actual play. And it seems that where most of the issues come from.
This is a public discussion forum, I am permitted to reply, and I think part of that includes pointing out when a person says one thing and does another. In this case you told Yellowshirt to learn some tact in a way that wasn't all that tactful. So, I thought I would like to point that inconsistency out. As to the underlying debate. I think the NFHS is doing more harm to the game than good. Yellow shirt is right. The NCAA has too many questions on the test regarding mundane administrative information and the majority of which is unimportant to the game. Sure, I like that shirts need numbers, but what do I cre if the number is 6 or 8 inches high, or if there is a manufactorers logo on the sleeves? NFHS has bastardized a game that is played one way throughout the world and only the NCAA and NFHS change things here. At least NCAA stays pretty close to the laws of the game. NFHS is very far away from it. The liability argument is a fallacy. If a parent wants to sue they can sue no matter what. So creating rule after rule doesn't really prevent that. I think they merely want their rules to more closely resemble other american sports rule books and not the laws of the game, which they probably think are "eurosnobbish", and I know that is an assumption but that is how I feel deep down inside. I also don't trust a code of rules that suggests the Dual or Double Dual are equal in value to the DSC - they are not and never will be. I get where you're coming from but I have very little respect for the NFHS's way of handling soccer. That's just how I feel about it, and no one has to agree with me.
In our area, the NFHS test is also taken by the coaches. I tend to think some of those questions may be for their benefit more than ours. I don't get too emotionally out of whack over the rule/law differences. It is what is it and until I am on the rules committee, I don't have a lot of input, other than the NCAA survey. There are certain rules/restarts etc., from each governing body that I like. Play-on!
Actually, USSF Ref, I am on your side. The term "bastardized" is an accurate description of what NHFS has done to soccer. If it isn't a crime, it should be. My belief is many of the rules in the high school game come from coaches who never played the sport. My high school coach never played soccer. He was a warm body who volunteered. While the coaching aspect in high school seems to be changing, the rules haven't. They need to scrap the rule book, either adopt FIFA Laws of the Game or re-write the rule book entirely.
I really enjoy refereeing High School in Central Iowa. USSF assignors are responsible for assigning, and we don't assign referees that we don't feel can handle their games. Sure, we sometimes have issues with players and coaches, but the Administrators have been for more discipline for both players and coaches. Many of the coaches are also coaching at the club level and have played at a fairly high level. There are a few that are PE or history teachers looking for a few extra bucks, but these are gradually being replaced by knowledgeable soccer coaches. We also use the DSC for all games except Frosh games where we use 2-man. I do a lot of Frosh games, and frequently wish we had a third pair of eyes because neither of us can be watching for offsides and the play as closely as we would like. However, it's rarely a big issue. The teams with freshman games are just glad to be getting on the field, and the pressure to win is a lot less. I like the option to call for an IFK for an injury, and prefer the throw-in rules! In FIFA, if a team makes a bad throw-in, the other team takes the throw. In HS, a throw-in that never enters the field deserves the same as a throw-in with a lifted foot or otherwise improperly thrown in. I also like the substitution rules (except mandatory sub out for a Yellow). With other youth/adult games, I have to check competition rules, because tournaments, and the various leagues have different substitution rules.
Actually, I just stated that tact is a good skill for referees to develop. It wasn't pointed at anybody, though it was in response to the "End of Discussion" BS that Yellowshirt posted. I could have directly insulted Yellowshirt, but that would be tactless, sort of like how you just insulted me without provocation. At least you made a good post afterward.
I don't buy your retort. You said it wasn't pointed at anybody and then you immediately say that it was in response to yellowshirt - so obviously it was directed at someone (yellowshirt), which was obvious from the start. I think we could all tell what you were saying and who you were saying it to, so you can't hide behind the "it wasn't meant to target anyone directly" card. What puzzles me more is how you can make that claim and immediately debunk yourself and expect us not to see through it.
Just last night at halftime of my HS varsity match, while quietly and innocently getting our liquid refreshment from the concession stand, my crew and I were accosted...a fair term to use in my opinion...by the AD of the home HS who proceeded to start telling us how he wasn't getting his money's worth (our match fees just went up $5 for the first time in ten years) because...out of three referees, only one has a whistle. He then proceeded to advocate for the return of the three-whistle system because then all three referees would be "working." I didn't listen to the end of his diatribe because I turned my back and walked away as he was looking at me in the middle of one of his sentences (maybe not so tactful!). This is the same guy who I had problems with about lightning and abandoning a match last season...who I like to refer to as the "most dangerous AD in North Carolina." Administrators like this are definitely part of the HS problem and not the solution.