Advice on the Laws of the Game

**Siberian** · 08/01/2019, 3:34 PM

Thanks NFB. The game was actually a local junior game and you seem bang on with your assessment. It happened in a split second and most people feel that even though the referee was technically right he could have used the excuse that he was in the process of awarding the penalty when the other player fired wide. The incident was very similar to what happened in the attached clip (first goal) and in this case the penalty was given

.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVoJ...oad%5Fpolicy=1

**Round Tower** · 10/01/2019, 7:56 PM

Originally Posted by NeverFeltBetter

I don't see anything in the laws that permit a referee to reverse an advantage so I would assume it would be a goal kick and a suitable caution for the player that had infringed. However, given that the scenario you have described would happen so quickly, I suspect a ref wouldn't have time to even signal an advantage, so may be in a position to award a penalty.

VAR might also complicate such a scenario.

Would not agree, if a ref. is playing advantage in any other part of the pitch, u see it all the time where he gives a team an advantage, they
loses the ball in a short period of time, length is the question?, he will call back the play and give the free kick. A peno. is no different and actually more important that the ball is brought back and peno given, more often or not the advantage is not brought back. Take the example of Salah against Newcastle when their was a foul when he was pulled back,some said he should have kept going and got his shot away, question if he failed to score would he be given the peno.

**Insidetherock** · 11/01/2019, 7:59 AM

Originally Posted by Round Tower

Would not agree, if a ref. is playing advantage in any other part of the pitch, u see it all the time where he gives a team an advantage, they
loses the ball in a short period of time, length is the question?, he will call back the play and give the free kick. A peno. is no different and actually more important that the ball is brought back and peno given, more often or not the advantage is not brought back. Take the example of Salah against Newcastle when their was a foul when he was pulled back,some said he should have kept going and got his shot away, question if he failed to score would he be given the peno.

I referee RT, and this came up as a specific question during one of the quarterly seminar's.

The advice were were given was that players weren't entitled to "two bites of the cherry"..

We were showed for example one video of a player going around a defender, being illegally tackled, going off balance but not falling down, getting a shot away while off balance, but seeing the ball just go past the post. Had the player gone down, it was a clear penalty, so most of us thought "no advantage, bring it back and award it"..

Advice was no, he took a chance to score and missed.. no advantage, goal kick.

**NeverFeltBetter** · 11/01/2019, 8:24 AM

Would it be fair to say that, in the specific scenario outlined, the shot at goal (which was missed) is the advantage being given?

**Siberian** · 11/01/2019, 9:37 AM

In the video clip I posted it could be argued that once the defender got back to challenge Barlow the advantage was lost and that may be why the referee gave the penalty. I still think that though what 'insidetherock' says is correct, where there is very little time between the incident and the follow up shot (in the match I was at it was seconds) the referee could call play back & use the excuse that there wasn't enough time between the foul & the effort on target for them to either blow for the foul or to play/signal/shout an advantage. Or maybe referees should never use advantage rule in the penalty box!!

Ps insidetherock, are you a South Tipp ref?

**Round Tower** · 11/01/2019, 3:30 PM

Originally Posted by Insidetherock

I referee RT, and this came up as a specific question during one of the quarterly seminar's.

The advice were were given was that players weren't entitled to "two bites of the cherry"..

We were showed for example one video of a player going around a defender, being illegally tackled, going off balance but not falling down, getting a shot away while off balance, but seeing the ball just go past the post. Had the player gone down, it was a clear penalty, so most of us thought "no advantage, bring it back and award it"..

Advice was no, he took a chance to score and missed.. no advantage, goal kick.

Did not know u were a ref. and i am not one, our junior team had a simuler situation last season in Mayo league, one of our player was through on goal went o go around the keeper, got clipped put off balance and put his shot wide, the ref. did not call it back for the foul. To make it worse it cost 2 points and a chance of promotion, i think iits wrong as it's giving advantage to the team doing wrong and penailising a player doing the right thing, u here people including me of players not staying on their feet and trying to score.
So what is the difference a player is fouled in midfield, puts off balance, he tries to play on but loses the ball, the ref. call back the play for the foul?.
Is it a case refs differ and teams suffer.

**NeverFeltBetter** · 08/06/2019, 4:17 PM

Something I have never seen before (though I'm sure its not the first time) just now in the Women's WC game between Spain and South Africa: four Spanish players forming their own wall a few feet ahead of the South African one when Spain got a scorable free-kick. I assume this is a response to the new rules saying you can't join an opposition wall ahead of a free? Interesting tactic either way. Oh, and they missed if anyone's wondering.

**Round Tower** · 11/06/2019, 4:06 PM

On Sun. we sent a former Mayo League referee Gos. Alexander to heaven reffing, he was a ref. in the late 80's early 90's, he must hold some reccoed sendding 32 off in a soccer match.
RIP Gos.

**Round Tower** · 18/08/2020, 10:24 PM

Local junior soccer match, goalkeeper let a freekick in over his head into the goals, in a gesture of disgust he kicked the goalpost fairly hard in disgust, no player near it, the ref. booked him for it, he got sentoff later rightly for a 2nd yellow.

Was the first yellow deserved.

**Subprime** · 19/08/2020, 8:27 AM

Yes the first card was correct. Also players are not supposed to clean the soles of their boots against a goal post

. Safety and dissent! When I was a ref, that was the instruction given.

**Insidetherock** · 19/08/2020, 10:33 AM

Originally Posted by Subprime

Yes the first card was correct. Also players are not supposed to clean the soles of their boots against a goal post

. Safety and dissent! When I was a ref, that was the instruction given.

Harsh, but yep, letter of the Law.

I can imagine the ref heard a few expletives when he gave the second yellow

**Round Tower** · 19/08/2020, 8:02 PM

Originally Posted by Subprime

Yes the first card was correct. Also players are not supposed to clean the soles of their boots against a goal post . Safety and dissent! When I was a ref, that was the instruction given.

Have u ever seen or a player booked for cleaning the soles of their boots against a goal post. Safety is debateable but how is it dissent, is it on them grounds that the first yellow card shown to the keeper was correct.

**Round Tower** · 19/08/2020, 8:08 PM

Originally Posted by Insidetherock

Harsh, but yep, letter of the Law.

I can imagine the ref heard a few expletives when he gave the second yellow

Yes but the keeper is always ccomplaining and giving out to the refs., the best was when a ref. who has officiated at European and International level. The keeper was complaining to the ref., i said to him to basicaly sh-t-pp, the ref turned around to me and said "it was ok, they were having a conversation". The ref last Sun. is known as the other ref. wanabee.

**Subprime** · 20/08/2020, 12:41 PM

"Have u ever seen or a player booked for cleaning the soles of their boots against a goal post. Safety is debateable but how is it dissent, is it on them grounds that the first yellow card shown to the keeper was correct."

That directive was from the league and advised also to stop players making rutts in the ground when taking free kicks as it creates a danger for players because they might trip over the little mound and it damages the pitch. Kicking the goal posts is potential damage to equipment and a danger to themselves "if they kicked it too hard2 (a player shall not be a danger to others or to themselves). The dissent is the same as a player hoping the ball off the ground, or kicking it away. Probably given as a show of dissent. As you say, if he was known for being mouthy, then ref probably took the opportunity presented.

**Round Tower** · 19/09/2020, 6:17 PM

In tonights PL game, Palace had a peno saved by Da Gea but VAR ruled that he was off the line, so it was retaken but a different player took it, in the 018 season we had a situation where we scored from a penalty which we scored from, but a player had encroached into the area. The ref. ordered a retake but insisted that the same penalty taker had to take the 2nd penalty, was it changed the laws.