Officials (13 Viewers)

[Frostie]

So I was at a referee development session last night and the national league ref said that if there is a cynical foul and you play on the caution doesn’t happen

if you stop play then it does
My lad and I thought this must be wrong but I’m thinking about it now and it is to encourage teams to take advantage of the situation I think rather than complain at the tackle

We are checking but that was exactly what was said which would explain the scenario above and mean we were the numptys not the ref

Yeah, that's kind of correct but it is more nuanced than most realise. For example if the foul was trying to stop a counter-attack or similar then yes, no need to issue a yellow card as by playing advantage the offender hasn't succeeding in preventing the attack.
In certain other situations though you would still issue a card.

EDIT:
Sorry Pete, just seen you have already posted the relevant part from LOTG.

 

---

[Sky Blue Pete]

not from what i've seen

I’ve checked and it’s not on the list for cautionable offences in its own right

i know it’s been said in a Reffing environment

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Yeah, that's kind of correct but it is more nuanced than most realise. For example if the foul was trying to stop a counter-attack or similar then yes, no need to issue a yellow card as by playing advantage the offender hasn't succeeding in preventing the attack.
In certain other situations though you would still issue a card.

Just put the law above and it’s exactly what you’re saying and exactly what happened a couple of times last night

 

[rhino1002]

I’ve checked and it’s not on the list for cautionable offences in its own right

i know it’s been said in a Reffing environment

I'm sure you are correct
i think it should be automatic booking no matter or when

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

I'm sure you are correct
i think it should be automatic booking no matter or when

Me too it’s cheating

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

So I was at a referee development session last night and the national league ref said that if there is a cynical foul and you play on the caution doesn’t happen

if you stop play then it does
My lad and I thought this must be wrong but I’m thinking about it now and it is to encourage teams to take advantage of the situation I think rather than complain at the tackle

We are checking but that was exactly what was said which would explain the scenario above and mean we were the numptys not the ref

Surely teams would be more encouraged to take advantage of the situation if they know the foul will receive the proper punishment as well?

Say early in the game, you'd often be better off getting the player booked and them walking a tightrope for the rest of the game. Very few advatnages actually result in goals.

 

[robbiethemole]

Well, we've got the wonderful David Webb to look forward to at t'udders, God knows what he'll be like, does give a lot of penalties.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Surely teams would be more encouraged to take advantage of the situation if they know the foul will receive the proper punishment as well?

Say early in the game, you'd often be better off getting the player booked and them walking a tightrope for the rest of the game. Very few advatnages actually result in goals.

I don’t write the laws

it’s not a yellow if advantage is played

 

[Sky Blue Harry H]

So, if an opposition player is through on goal, can Fadz two foot one or maybe two of their better players with impunity, as the ref says it's an advantage to the opposition to let play carry on?!?!?!

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

I don’t write the laws

it’s not a yellow if advantage is played

Wasn't aimed at you specifically, just you posted the rile

Just pointing out that if that is the position then why would a player take th advantage when they'd be much better off stopping and getting the player booked.

Even if play has continued as therefore the player has failed to disrupt or whatever, it an have a small effect on a player's balance, spped, acceleration etc and just that split second could be the difference between scoring and not.

It should be a booking regardless.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Wasn't aimed at you specifically, just you posted the rile

Just pointing out that if that is the position then why would a player take th advantage when they'd be much better off stopping and getting the player booked.

Even if play has continued as therefore the player has failed to disrupt or whatever, it an have a small effect on a player's balance, spped, acceleration etc and just that split second could be the difference between scoring and not.

It should be a booking regardless.

I know but that’s not what the law says about a foul in a promising position

I’m just trying to help people not get too upset when a ref follows the laws of the game

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

I know but that’s not what the law says about a foul in a promising position

I’m just trying to help people not get too upset when a ref follows the laws of the game

And I'm saying the law is wrong and should be changed.

 

[Hobo]

Well we might not agree with the laws - but we can't criticise the ref for applying the law correctly.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

And I'm saying the law is wrong and should be changed.

Ok

 

[Johhny Blue]

So, if an opposition player is through on goal, can Fadz two foot one or maybe two of their better players with impunity, as the ref says it's an advantage to the opposition to let play carry on?!?!?!

No. That’s only for other teams

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

So, if an opposition player is through on goal, can Fadz two foot one or maybe two of their better players with impunity, as the ref says it's an advantage to the opposition to let play carry on?!?!?!

No if it’s a dogso it’s still a yellow if an advantage is played

 

[Sky Blue Harry H]

No if it’s a dogso it’s still a yellow if an advantage is played

I'll pretend I understand what a dogso is.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

I'll pretend I understand what a dogso is.

I’m sorry denial of a goal scoring opportunity

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

No if it’s a dogso it’s still a yellow if an advantage is played

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I'll pretend I understand what a dogso is.

He means the referee will book someone for the offence even if the player is man's best friend. Even more heartless than we thought

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

I’m sorry denial of a goal scoring opportunity

so it’s only not a booking when the player is stopping a promising attack

It’s a bit mad

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

so it’s only not a barking when the player is stopping a promising attack

It’s a bit rrrrruff

OK I'll stop

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

OK I'll stop

Tell you’ve not been teaching all day

 

[Johhny Blue]

I'll pretend I understand what a dogso is.

AWMUOOAN?

 

[Johhny Blue]

(Are we making up our own acronyms now?)

 

[stupot07]

I've no problem with the ref. making the decision.The incident in front of the main stand when the ref was unsighted all it needed was"i didn't see it" from the ref "x put it out " from the linesman.The way he allowed the shenanigans with our free kick near the end before finaly booking Wilson and the diving by both sides which went unpunished.No control.

It's not helped that players show very little honesty, appealing every decision, trying to con the ref to gain any little advantage. The incident you mention in front of the stand is a prime example, it was clear to all that it had come off Palmer last and was Sunderland's throw in, but Palmer appealed and held onto the ball, knowing it has come off him last.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

 

[kg82]

Here it is from loaf - laws of association football

what an arse headed law


Advantage

If the referee plays the advantage for an offence for which a caution/sending-off would have been issued had play been stopped, this caution/sending-off must be issued when the ball is next out of play. However, if the offence was denying the opposing team an obvious goal-scoring opportunity, the player is cautioned for unsporting behaviour; if the offence was interfering with or stopping a promising attack, the player is not cautioned.

Well, this is completely backwards! All anybody wants is consistency in refereeing, and then they write it into the rules to be anything but!

 

[Macca1987]

It made a mockery of it Saturday, player fouled (badly), but ref plays on as Vik has the ball on the half way line, he is then surrounded by 5 or 6 Sunderland players and has no support, so where's the advantage in that

 

[Nick]

Let's face it, we all know the Sunday League player who calls the ref a c**t for being awful is to blame.

 

[shmmeee]

For me should be a simple rule: anything that’s not a genuine attempt to get the ball should be a yellow. Shirt pulling, cynical leg chops, arguably all hand balls. And throw in walking away with the ball when it’s not your set piece, with an instant red if you then throw the ball away.

OK maybe not that last one.

 

[shmmeee]

It made a mockery of it Saturday, player fouled (badly), but ref plays on as Vik has the ball on the half way line, he is then surrounded by 5 or 6 Sunderland players and has no support, so where's the advantage in that

Genuine Q when the ref plays advantage can you just stop and take the free kick?

 

[ceetee]

Genuine Q when the ref plays advantage can you just stop and take the free kick?

I think the old adage " play to the whistle" is the answer

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

I think the old adage " play to the whistle" is the answer

But if you deliberately choose not to take the advantage surely the ref can't just them continue the game saying he gave you the advantage.

 

[Nick]

You often see it when players just stop and decide for themselves.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

You often see it when players just stop and decide for themselves.

Pretty certain if players knew this law they’d make sure they stopped to ensure the opponent got a card