Futsal CELL Webinars

---

As the Yellow team circulates possession between the fixo, the left ala, and the flying GK, the fixo attempts a pass to the right ala. At 6:19, the pass is intercepted by Black No3, who immediately transitions into attack. Recognizing that the Yellow goal is unguarded due to the use of the flying GK, Black No3 quickly strikes the ball from distance toward the open goal. While the ball is still traveling toward the goal, the horn sounds at 6:18, signaling the end of the half.

Decision:

Although the outcome may appear unfair, the correct decision is not to award the goal. At the moment the timekeeper's acoustic signal sounded to indicate the end of the period; the ball had not completely crossed the Yellow team's goal line. In accordance with the Futsal LOTG, Law 7 (p. 57):

"The period ends when the acoustic signal sounds, even if the referees do not signal the end by blowing their whistle, unless no timekeeper is present, or the signal from the timekeeper cannot be sounded due to equipment failure..."

Since the acoustic signal sounded before the ball wholly crossed the goal line, play ended immediately at that moment. The correct decision is, therefore, to disallow the goal and end the half with the score unchanged.

Mentoring points for Referees:

This incident highlights the importance of anticipating critical situations as the end of a period approach. During the final seconds, referees should maintain heightened concentration while remaining fully aware of the remaining time and prepared for the acoustic signal from the timekeeper. Effective teamwork is essential: both referees should be mentally ready to immediately recognize the end-of-period signal and confidently communicate the correct decision, particularly when a potential goal is involved. Although players, team officials, and spectators may perceive the outcome as unfair, referees must apply the LOTG exactly as written. In such situations, calm, confident body language and clear communication help reinforce the credibility of the decision and minimize unnecessary dissent. Referees should avoid being influenced by the apparent fairness of the outcome and instead rely on factual observations and the requirements of Law 7. A brief consultation between the referee and 2nd referee, if needed to confirm the sequence of events, can further demonstrate teamwork and ensure the correct decision is accepted.

Green No9, playing in the pivot position, received a pass from teammate Green No7 and controlled the ball before being challenged by Blue No2. The defender approached from behind and failed to make any contact with the ball, instead kicking Green No9 on the right leg.

Decision:

The challenge by Blue No2 was made with no genuine attempt to play the ball. Approaching from behind, Blue No2 made forceful contact with Green No9 at the ankle/Achilles tendon area without touching the ball. The nature, point of contact, and intensity of the challenge endangered the safety of the opponent and constituted the use of excessive force. The decision is a DFK to the Green team (recorded as an accumulated foul against the Blue team) and a red card for Blue No2 for Serious Foul Play.

Mentoring points for Referees:

Player safety must always be the referee's highest priority. Develop the awareness and confidence to immediately recognize challenges from behind that have little or no possibility of playing the ball, particularly when forceful contact is made to the ankle or Achilles tendon area. Demonstrating decisive action in these situations reinforces the referee's commitment to protecting the players and builds credibility with both teams. Remain composed and project confidence throughout the incident. Anticipate play around the pivot to maintain an optimal angle of view and a clear line of sight, enabling an immediate and accurate decision. A strong whistle, calm body language, and a confident red card procedure send a clear message that SFP will not be tolerated. Manage the emotional temperature of the match by isolating the offending player, using positive presence and effective communication to prevent confrontation, and working seamlessly with the 2nd referee and timekeeper to ensure the correct restart, proper recording of the accumulated foul, and continued control of the match. Your calm authority and consistency will enhance player acceptance of the decision and contribute to maintaining match control.

At 7:27, following a missed challenge by the White team GK (wearing a blue jersey), Black No8 gained possession and advanced toward an open goal-scoring opportunity. White No19 pursued and attempted to challenge with a sliding tackle. At 7:25, the ball was positioned between both players and remained playable by either player. Black No8 made contact with the ball (rolling it) and playing it before White No19 challenged it.

Decision: The sliding tackle by White No19 was executed at speed with a straight leg, and his trailing leg made contact with the standing leg of Black No8. The challenge involved significant speed, force, and intensity, clearly endangering the safety of the opponent. In accordance with the Futsal LOTG, this action constitutes the use of excessive force, defined as when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and/or endangers the safety of an opponent. The correct disciplinary sanction is a red card to White No19 for Serious Foul Play. The correct restart is a direct free kick (accumulated foul) for the Black team.

Mentoring points for Referees: Although contacts occur, the Futsal Laws should make the game as safe as possible. This requires players to show respect for their opponents, and referees should create a safe environment by dealing strongly with those whose play is too aggressive and dangerous. The Futsal Laws embody the unacceptability of unsafe play in their disciplinary phrases, e.g. “reckless challenge” (caution) and “endangering the safety of an opponent” or “using excessive force” (RC).

From a refereeing and match control perspective, this incident provides several important learning points for the referee team:

- The referee should recognize the tactical and emotional context of the situation immediately after the goalkeeper’s missed challenge, as the attacking player was progressing toward an open goal-scoring opportunity. These moments often create desperation challenges from defenders and require heightened anticipation and concentration.

- Optimal positioning and angle of view are critical. The referee should work to maintain an open viewing angle between the challenger and the attacker in transition situations to clearly evaluate the point of contact, the intensity of the challenge, and whether excessive force is used.- In challenges involving sliding tackles at speed, the referee should focus on key criteria such as speed, intensity, point of contact, body control, and the use of the legs or studs. A straight-leg challenge with forceful contact to the opponent’s standing leg is a strong indicator of Serious Foul Play.

Following a kick by the Green team GK No1, the ball was directed toward Green pivot No9. As the player positioned himself to potentially head the ball, the White team GK challenged possession and attempted to clear the ball with a punch before the attacker could make contact.

Decision:

The decision should be based on the following considerations: whether the ball was clearly heading toward the goal and whether the GK handled the ball outside of his penalty area. In this situation, the answer to both considerations is yes. Therefore, the correct decision is to award a DFK to the Green team, recorded as an accumulated foul, and to send off the White team GK for DOGSO-Handball.

Mentoring points for Referees:

This situation offers an important psychological and tactical reflection point for futsal match officials. While correct positioning near the top of the penalty area remains essential to accurately evaluate the GK’s point of contact with the ball, referees must also demonstrate composure, patience, and clear analytical thinking when applying the DOGSO criteria under pressure. From a psychological perspective, situations involving a potential DOGSO offense often create an immediate emotional expectation from players, benches, and spectators for a dismissal. The referee team must resist reacting solely to the consequence of the action and instead focus on evaluating all tactical elements objectively and sequentially. Maintaining emotional control and slowing down the decision-making process internally allows the referee to distinguish between a merely promising attack and an obvious goal-scoring opportunity. In this case, if the kick by the Green team GK No1 had simply resulted in a pass toward his pivot, with the attacker still having his back to goal, not yet in possession or control of the ball, and where the trajectory of the pass was not directly and immediately toward the goal, the DOGSO criteria would likely not have been fully satisfied. The referee must carefully assess: the direction of play, the likelihood of the attacker gaining control, the speed and weight of the pass, the distance to goal, and the realistic possibility of an immediate shot on goal. Considering the uncertainty surrounding the pivot’s ability to control the ball and transform the attack into an immediate scoring opportunity, the attack cannot be classified as “obvious.” This distinction is critical at "elite level" futsal, where transitions develop extremely quickly, and referees must avoid over-penalizing actions based purely on perception or external pressure. Therefore, in this scenario, the correct technical decision would be: a DFK to the Green team for the deliberate handball offense, the foul recorded as an accumulated foul, and a caution to the White team goalkeeper for unsporting behavior for stopping a promising attack. This approach reflects strong match control, emotional discipline, and a mature understanding of the spirit and application of the LOTG futsal.

After releasing the ball to a teammate, Blue No3 attempted to move past Black No15. As Blue No3 advanced on his right side, Black No15 raised his right arm and initiated contact with his elbow, making contact with the face of Blue No3.

Decision:

Black No15 used excessive force and brutality against Blue No3, with no attempt to challenge for the ball.  He raised his arm to lead the contact with his elbow.The action constitutes Violent Conduct. The correct decision is to send off Black No15. Play is restarted with a Direct Free Kick to the Blue team (counted as an accumulated foul against the Black team) from the location of the offense.

Mentoring points for Referees:

• Recognition of Off-the-Ball Incidents: Maintain active scanning after the pass is released. Incidents of violent conduct often occur when the ball is no longer the immediate focus.
• Focus on Point of Contact: Contact to the face with the elbow is a critical indicator of excessive force; prioritize player safety in your evaluation.
• Distinguish Nature of the Action: Clearly identify when a player is not challenging for the ball: this is a key element in classifying the offense as violent conduct rather than a foul challenge.
• Positioning and Angle of View: Anticipate forward movement after a pass and adjust positioning to keep both players within your optimal line of sight.
• Use of Teamwork: If the referee’s view is partially screened, rely on the second referee or third official for support and confirmation.
• Strong Disciplinary Presence: A clear, confident send-off with appropriate body language helps manage player reactions and reinforces match control.

At 16:58, Red #9 challenged Yellow #8 for the ball and made upper-body contact; however, Yellow #8 was able to continue playing the ball. The ball was then intercepted by Red #8 (Fixo), who initiated a counter-attack and passed to Red #9. At 16:53, Yellow #6 (Pivot) committed a clear holding offence by grabbing Red #9’s jersey, but Red #9 was able to continue, break free, and pass to Red #8, who had a promising opportunity to shoot on goal. The referee demonstrated awareness by delaying his whistle and correctly applying advantage at 16:52, clearly signaling once the attacking benefit materialized; the subsequent shot missed and resulted in a goal clearance.

Decision:

The initial challenge by Red #9 on Yellow #8 could have been penalized as a charging foul; however, at this level of futsal, the contact is considered acceptable and within normal playing intensity, so allowing play to continue is supported. Following this, the referee correctly applied advantage at 16:52 after Yellow #6 committed a holding offence on Red #9, recognizing that the Red team retained possession and developed a clear goal-scoring opportunity; therefore, the original foul should not be brought back. Nevertheless, as per the Laws of the Game (Interpretation and Recommendations, p.159), the holding offence, being a tactical action that interfered with a promising attack, must still be sanctioned with a caution at the next stoppage. Since play was subsequently stopped for a goal clearance, the referee should caution Yellow #6 for Unsporting Behavior/Persistent/Tactical Holding.

Mentoring points for Referees:

For further improvement, the referee should focus on consistently following through with disciplinary sanctions after applying advantage, ensuring that clear tactical offences such as holding are not left unpunished at the next stoppage. Additionally, continued attention to early physical challenges, like the initial contact by Red #9, will help set the threshold for acceptable physicality and manage player expectations. Strong, visible communication (both verbal and signals) should be maintained to reinforce decisions and credibility.  

At 1:10, Yellow No5 gains possession by taking the ball from Red No4 and immediately advances toward the Red teams' goal. At this moment, the Red team is using a flying GK, meaning the goal is effectively unguarded, as confirmed in the replay sequence.

As Yellow No5 continues his forward run toward goal, Red No4 attempts to recover defensively. At 1:08, in an attempt to evade a sliding challenge from Red No4, Yellow No5 pushes the ball forward and tries to jump over the opponent. However, Red No4 fails to play the ball and instead his left leg raises, making contact with Yellow No5 and tripping him, thereby stopping the attacking movement.

When evaluating whether this incident constitutes Denial of an Obvious Goal-Scoring Opportunity (DOGSO), the referee must consider the following elements:

- Distance to Goal: Yellow No5 is moving directly toward the Red goal and is within a realistic scoring distance.

- Direction of Play: The attacker is progressing straight toward goal, with clear attacking momentum.

- Control or Likelihood of Control of the Ball: Yellow No5 has played the ball forward and remains in position to continue his run, indicating a high likelihood of regaining control if not fouled.

- Number and Position of Defenders: a) The goal is unguarded due to the use of the flying GK, b) Red No2 is positioned too far to the left side of the play and cannot realistically challenge Yellow No5 before a potential shot on goal. Consequently, Red No2 cannot be considered an active deefender capable of preventing the goal-scoring opportunity

Decision:

Tripping foul by Red No4 on Yellow No5, sanctioned by a Red Card to Red No4 for DOGSO-Foul.  The restart would be a DFK to the Yellow team and the Red team would have an accumulated foul

Mentoring points for Referees:

In futsal, situations involving a flying GK frequently create unguarded goal scenarios, which significantly increases the likelihood of DOGSO when an attacker is fouled while moving toward goal. Referees must carefully evaluate the position of remaining defenders and determine whether any defender has a realistic possibility of intervening before the attacker can shoot.

The white team is employing the flying GK tactic, with the GK wearing a blue jersey. White #7 attempts a pass to his flying GK, who is positioned inside his own half of the court.

At this moment, the referee must:

• Be aware of whether the ball has been touched by an opponent after the GK’s previous release.
• Monitor potential infringements related to the four-second rule and the GK’s participation in play.
• Remain attentive to any act that may unfairly deceive opponents.

Just before the pass is initiated, the flying GK, located inside his own half, loudly shouts “No, no, no,” clearly indicating awareness that the ball may not legally be played again by him.

As the pass reaches him:

• The flying GK deliberately steps over the ball.
• He does not touch it.
• The ball continues its trajectory and crosses the end line.
• The referee stops play with a whistle.

Technical Analysis
The GK does not touch the ball. Therefore: There is no technical infringement related to a second touch, and the ball simply goes out of play over the goal line.Since the ball crosses the goal line without touching the GK, there is no offence committed and the play stops solely because the ball has left the field of play.

Restart

If play was stopped only because the ball went out of play, the correct restart must be determined in accordance with the LOTG. However, the referee stopped play for another reason (e.g., uncertainty regarding possession or an external factor), then the dropped ball procedure applies: If play is stopped and no infringement has occurred, the restart is a dropped ball for one player of the team that had or would have gained possession, if this can be determined. Otherwise, it is dropped for one player of the team that last touched the ball.

Mentoring Referee Learning Points

- Anticipate GK participation when a team uses the flying goalkeeper.

- Be fully aware of the “second touch” restriction in the GK’s own half.

- Distinguish between verbal team communication and unsporting verbal distraction.

- Ensure the correct restart based strictly on the reason play was stopped.

- Apply dropped ball procedures accurately when no offence has been committed.