OK PLEASE READ THIS CAREFULLY... I want you to answer the following question with out looking at LOAF and WITHOUT giving an explanation, simply put 1, 2, 3, or 4 We will discuss it after the weekend. Whilst taking kicks to decide the winner of a match the flood lights fail what action do you take... 1 Replay the game at a later date 2 Toss a coin and report the facts 3 Draw lots and report the facts 4 Abandon the game and report the facts Keep Smiling Dodgy Ref
I assume you did not complete the kicks or they were tied after taking the minimum number of kicks. If so then the answer is. 4. Abandon the game and report the facts. It's not the job of the referee, but the league to decide what to do. Most leagues would probably complete the kicks from the penalty mark at a later date.
4 is the answer. Even if they weren't tied or you weren't at a convenient stopping point. If it's dark and you can't see adequately, and there is no reasonable way to get lights, you abandon the game and report the conditions.
You pull over a few cars, turn the headlights on and finish taking the penalties. After all, how much light do you need to take penalties. Be practical, the problem with most American referees is that they are too much by the book; they want a written regulation for every specific situation. Car headlights used to work when we played late afternoon games in NYC parks, back when nobody had any flood lights on public fields.
DR, I might say that my actions would definitely be impacted by whether this occurred during dayling or nighttime. If during daylight, I would probably do nothing and allow the taking of the kicks to continue until we had a winner. If, however, this method of deciding a winner could not continue, due to the fact that it was now pitch dark, then, depending on the rules of competition, I might do either 2,3 or 4, (but not 1, since as Alberto pointed out this is not my call). SW
LISTEN YOU LOT IF YOU ARE GOING TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ON A DISCUSSION BOARD YOU SHOULD READ THE QUESTION AND UNDERSTAND IT BEFORE BLURTING OUT WAFFLE. Now I appologise for that little rant but I am quite withinin my rights to do that. I far to often look at a discussion board and read the origional posting and 3/4 replys and think to my self "Nobody has actually answered the guys question" It makes it even more difficult when the first two replys are moderetors !!!! It has somewhat completely ruined what could have been a good discussion but anyway lets learn from this and move on... The reason I posed the question was this... Up untill two years ago FIFA stated in LOAF that if at the taking of kicks to decide a match the kicks could not be completed then the result was decided by the toss of a coin or the drawing of lots. That is fact and if you had abandoned the game then technicaly you would have been wrong. Perhaps nobody would have noticed if you had just abandoned the game and reported it but as I say in Law you would have been wrong. The point I am making is that over the last 5/6 years there are many things that have been removed from the LOAF (certainly in England if not from USSF) another example is the deceptive call of "My ball" where if a player delibrately calls "Mine" in order to deceive an opponent then you would stop play and award an IFK against the opponent and probably a caution for USB nowadays there is absolutely nothing in LOAF about this so when an instructer goes over the LOAF how does a new referee actually manage to apply the same LOAF as referees that qualified in years gone by. Other examples off the top of my head include CHarging the Goalkeeper when hes got the ball in his goal area or charging a player within playing distance of the ball there is an endless list yet there is nothing stated as to weather they are "unwritten" and obviously part and parcel of the spirit of LOAF or weather they have fallen by the wayside and should no longer be applied. From the two moderators replys they were either never in the USSF LOAf or you have been clearly instructed that you no longer draw lots. It would be handy if you could check over your USSF LOAF from a few years back to see what it states. Keep Smiling Dodgy Ref
Your funny, you get agitated and excited when you asked us to render a response without researching it. Kicks from the penalty mark is not something we typically see in the normal run of our refereeing. The 2002 edition of the LOTG do not anywhere state that you draw lots or toss a coin to determine a winner. I'll have to wait until I get home and hope I have the 1999 or 2000 edition to confirm.
Under the Procedures to Determine the Winner of a Match it states the relevant LOTG and IFAB decisions apply when kicks from the penalty mark are being taken. Under Law 5 the referee is granted the authority to stop, terminate, or abandon a match for any outside interference -- which includes the lighting of the field. Based on those two statements, the referee has every right to terminate the match early and file in his report that the PK series could not be completed at that time. In fact, this may be the only course of action that truly is fair depending on the tournament regulations and level of play. Afterall if you're talking a youth game that has no real consequences for a win or loss and you're able to light the field through outside means, then by all means that probably be the best solution. I've been a referee for a long time and I've only heard of the "drawing of lots" or "tossing of a coin" rule when referred to in the history books -- circa 1905. This hasn't been in effect for many decades, disgarded when money became involved. Also on a personal nit-picky sort of note, the proper international moniker of the game rules is the Laws of the Game. There are only 2 or 3 countries I'm aware of that entitle their rule publication the Laws of Association Football, or the "LOAF" as you love calling them. Personally that reduces your credibility in my eyes as it fails to accomodate a common language in the international community, of which this board reflects. I've appreciated your posts in the past but when you start attacking others here for no reason a line needs to be drawn. You asked a question, stated that we are not to refer to the "LOAF," and then attacked those who replied based off some archaic rule that is not in effect. To answer you original post, the answer is 5. NONE OF THE ABOVE. The most technical and correct course of action would be to terminate the match early and file a report to the appropriate authorities. To abandon a match is to suggest it is not suitable at that time to be conducted -- lack of players, absence of a team, non-compliant equipment. Any advanced student of the laws would recognize this distinction in a heartbeat due to its historical usage (as noted in the ATR as well).
While drawing lots or tossing coins might be how the winner was determined, the referee wouldn't be overseeing the drawing or the tossing. Those are used in situations where the tie cannot be broken and the match cannot be replayed due to schedule constraints. Drawing of lots is still used when tie breakers cannot determine who advances or who advances with the higher seed (the latter has actually happened in the World Cup). If a FIFA tournament were played in a venue without lights (not likely) and the kicks from the mark could not be completed, the tournament officials would oversee the drawing of lots to determine who advanced, not the referee of the game in question (if it were to dark to take the PKs, how could they see to draw the lots?). If the tournament competition rules had other provisions (such as replay the game), they would still be beyond the scope of the game referee's responsibilities. In other words, as far as the referee is concerned, the answer is 4.
I've been a referee for a long time and I've only heard of the "drawing of lots" or "tossing of a coin" rule when referred to in the history books -- circa 1905. This hasn't been in effect for many decades, disgarded when money became involved. Statesmen You were quite happy to quote me a few weeks ago and then you go and slate me like I'm some sort of ignorant non discript that has no comprehension of the Laws of Association Football. It matters not what I refered to in my origional post it was patently obvious that I requested every one to state one answer without explanation. The fact that you can not achieve this and then slander me after your inadequacies speaks volumes about yourself. As a matter of fact the FIFA Laws of Association Football dated 1997-1998 clearly state that the drawing of lots or the toss of a coin shall decide the outcome of a match. If you had a copy you would be aware of this as it is not part of the USSF ATR but it was authorised by the International Football Association Board. I do not expect or accept an appology as I am not in a position to deem such an appology meaningful I can only state that I believe you are ill informed and naive in your criticism of me. The fact that you state you have been refereeing for a long time is no excuse for not reading a post and understanding it before you post a reply. Keep Smiling Dodgy Ref
Gentlemen, lets all take a deep breath and calm down. Dodgy, it just so happens I still have a copy of the 1997 LOTG and nowhere does it state the method of deciding the winner of a match either by coin toss or drawing of lots.
Alberto, It states it in mine under "The taking of penaltys to decide the winner of a match" and it is the last paragraph. So if this is different how do the FIFA officials go about applying different LAWS and Directives from different Associations. I do not think it is up to a competition to draw lots in my LOAF it makes it sound like the responsibility of the referee and I think it is quite feasable to draw lots at a point in time where it is too dark to take penaltys yet not too dark to draw lots/toss a coin. Either way as I was origionally trying to state there are a number of anomollys between the associations around the world. I would suggest that in USSF the LOAF is called LOTG to avoid confusion with American Football I am not aware of what they are called in other countries and I respect that you refer to them as LOTG but I don't think there is an issue in me refering to them as LOAF. Keep Smiling Dodgy Ref
If you look on fifa.com, you find the LOTG. It's the PDF version of what we get in hard copy. Dodgy, is that what you refer to as the LOAF?
LOAF = LOTG After checking several UK referee sites, while I was able to find references to antiquated print copies of the Laws of Association Football (LOAF) all current electronic (PDF) copies are the same link to FIFA's Laws of the Game that we use here in the US as you can see if you go to the following url: http://www.carosi.freeserve.co.uk/corshamreferee/laws.htm Also if you go there, and follow the link for "Kicks from the penatly mark", you will find a reference towards the bottom of the page to the coin toss and drawing of lots. It is important to note that this reference is not in their Laws (OAF or OTG, take your pick) at all, but in the FA's Advice, Instruction, Q&A materials. In fact, it is referred to as :...the latest Law advice for Referees, players, managers, coaches and spectators." What I am curious about is what is the disagreement here? We as referees do not operate under some universal truth (aside from law 22) but rather, as we are instucted by our National and state programs. Of course there will be differences, but these should never be points of contention, but rather points of interest to share. For example, we do not have to make special provisions during games for cattle (ie. Water Buffalo) on the pitch, but I worked with a Nigerian referee a few years ago who pointd out that this was quite common where he came from.
Whipple, What I was trying to establish in my origional post was that certain things in the past were clearly stated in Law but are now no longer done so. But should we still apply them or are they no longer part of LOAF another example is the shoulder charging of players, whilst Law 12 covers charging a player ie not shoulder to shoulder it no longer states that if a player shoulder charges an opponent when the ball is not in playing distance then you should award an IFK, it did state this in 96/97 LOAF I have followed your train of thought and looked at Julians website. I know Julian very well from the last couple of years on the English Referees Association website. It is indeed only down as advice on his site whereas what I refer to is taken directly from 97/98 Laws of Association Football (That is what it says on the front cover and spine of the book) It is not down as part of the 17 Laws but is printed directly after Law17 and is as much apart of Law at that time as the fact that both teams must take 5 kicks before sudden death commences. With regard to LOAF and LOTG The book we use in England is published by The FA and is approved by the IFAB no doubt yours is published by the USSF and also approved in the same manner. It used to be called the referees chart untill it changed its name to "LOAF" The 2002/3 is also called LOAF but once inside it refers to LOTG because obviously once you read the title you know which game it refers to but to refer to LOTG out of context could mean Rugby Football in England or American Football in the USA which is why I always refer to it as LOAF, also in England there is a saying "Use your Loaf" which means "Use your head" hence one more reason for me to use it by I really Have no problem using LOTG as well It was just statesmen getting upset because I had a go at the mederators for not reading the question before putting there answers down and then explaining it when I had specificaly asked them not too. This was so that different referees that had been educated using different years apart LOTG may have come up with different answers. Still the whole thread seemed to get obliterated. Keep Smiling Dodgy Ref