Question Regarding a Caution

[Nevadaref]

Quebec gave an excellent summary, which is also applicable to NFHS rules for this play.
In short, a call of some kind MUST be made at the time of the action. Unless the referee indicates that advantage is being played or stops the game right then to call the foul, he has no right to go back and give a caution at the next stoppage. Well, also if an AR saw the action and couldn't get his attention immediately, then it would be appropriate, since a call by the AR was made at the time of the foul. Otherwise, it must be assumed that the action was considered trifling. (And just to nitpick a bit, Quebec said that "play MUST be stopped immediately" for sending-off offenses. That is not true. FIFA Law 5 contains the powers and duties of the referee. Listed therein is: "takes disciplinary action against players guilty of cautionable and sending-off offenses. He is not obliged to take this action immediately but must do so when the ball next goes out of play"
However, the referee is strongly advised not to play advantage when sending-off offenses are involved because the volatile nature of these situations could quickly escalate into something much worse, if the players believe the action is not being punished and that justice is not being served.)


You seem to put a great deal of weight upon the fact that this action took place away from the ball and didn't affect the play. So, was it trifling? From your description, I certainly don't believe so. Therefore, this was a foul. Whether it is near the ball or not, it NEEDS to be acknowledged and punished, especially since this was more than a normal foul. The offender was simply stupid for committing such a foul away from the play when the attacker had no chance to make a play. Poor decision by the defender.

In your scenario, while it seems that the Referee didn't acknowledge the foul and give advantage to the offensive team on the play, perhaps he did. There is a school of thought which advocates not verbalizing advantage in the penalty area, see below. Perhaps this is why, in his mind, he went back at the next stoppage and cautioned the player. Or perhaps the referee purposely set aside the laws of the game/NFHS rules in order to dispense what he believed to be proper justice. I do not referee in this manner, but I have seen it done many times.

Now, giving advantage in the penalty area is a very touchy issue. The team better have a tremendous opportunity to score because by not immediately calling the foul, the referee is taking away the awarding of a penalty kick (if the foul would result in a DFK). There is some strong advice in USSF play to be very careful about playing advantage in the penalty area. We discussed it in a thread over on the NFHS forum.

Personally, I would have awarded a PK and cautioned the defender as soon as I saw that the attacking team wasn't going to score right away from the corner kick.