Any refs on here? (1 Viewer)

[rob9872]

Having already realised I don't know the laws of the game after the offside free kick in our half v Fulham, I have another.

England tonight and a pen given away by Shaw. Definitely a foul, definitely in the area, but is it not an indirect free kick rather than a penalty? Something you rarely see these days so am I outdated or is the decision wrong as nobody appeared to question it.

 

---

[hill83]

If there is any doubt any of them will see this thread mate

 

[SAJ]

Having already realised I don't know the laws of the game after the offside free kick in our half v Fulham, I have another.

England tonight and a pen given away by Shaw. Definitely a foul, definitely in the area, but is it not an indirect free kick rather than a penalty? Something you rarely see these days so am I outdated or is the decision wrong as nobody appeared to question it.

Not a qualified ref but my understanding is if there is contact it has to be a direct free kick which if in the area would result in a penalty If there is no contact then it could be perceived as dangerous play which if there is no contact would be an indirect free kick anywhere on the pitch.

 

[mark82]

Having already realised I don't know the laws of the game after the offside free kick in our half v Fulham, I have another.

England tonight and a pen given away by Shaw. Definitely a foul, definitely in the area, but is it not an indirect free kick rather than a penalty? Something you rarely see these days so am I outdated or is the decision wrong as nobody appeared to question it.

Contact makes it direct free-kick / penalty. Bit shit but right call.

@Adge is a referee. Can probably give more.

 

[mark82]

And just seen SAJ beat me to it.

 

[fernandopartridge]

Having already realised I don't know the laws of the game after the offside free kick in our half v Fulham, I have another.

England tonight and a pen given away by Shaw. Definitely a foul, definitely in the area, but is it not an indirect free kick rather than a penalty? Something you rarely see these days so am I outdated or is the decision wrong as nobody appeared to question it.

What happened to Adge who posted on here? He is / was a ref

 

[Sky Blue Harry H]

Apart from when a goalkeeper picks the ball up from a back pass, I honestly can't remember when I last saw an indirect free kick given in the penalty area. I thought obstruction was an offence that could cause this - may be others, but love it if someone could give an example where one has been given (this century?!)

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Apart from when a goalkeeper picks the ball up from a back pass, I honestly can't remember when I last saw an indirect free kick given in the penalty area. I thought obstruction was an offence that could cause this - may be others, but love it if someone could give an example where one has been given (this century?!)

Every offside used to be indirect

I wasn’t aware of the contact rule. Seems a bit rich when it was completely instigated by the attacker

 

[chiefdave]

Is the confusion the 'if an offence involves contact, it is penalised by a direct free kick' part?

A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:

• charges
• jumps at
• kicks or attempts to kick
• pushes
• strikes or attempts to strike (including head-butt) • tackles or challenges
• trips or attempts to trip

If an offence involves contact, it is penalised by a direct free kick.

 

[Frostie]

Apart from when a goalkeeper picks the ball up from a back pass, I honestly can't remember when I last saw an indirect free kick given in the penalty area. I thought obstruction was an offence that could cause this - may be others, but love it if someone could give an example where one has been given (this century?!)

Obstruction was removed from the laws of the game years ago & replaced with"impeding progress of an opponent" but is basically the same thing. The reason you almost never see it is 99.9% of the time it results in contact &, as others have already alluded to, there is no foul involving contact that can be penalised by an indirect free-kick.

I didn't see the England game live but seen the incident since, penalty & yellow card for dangerous play is correct.

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct

IFAB Laws of the Game

www.thefa.com

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Apart from when a goalkeeper picks the ball up from a back pass, I honestly can't remember when I last saw an indirect free kick given in the penalty area. I thought obstruction was an offence that could cause this - may be others, but love it if someone could give an example where one has been given (this century?!)

The old 6 second rule used to lead to that as well, but I’m fairly sure the wording has changed

 

[Frostie]

The old 6 second rule used to lead to that as well, but I’m fairly sure the wording has changed

That's still there, very rarely seen though;

An indirect free kick is awarded if a goalkeeper, inside their penalty area, commits any of the following offences:

controls the ball with the hand/arm for more than six seconds before releasing it

 

[rob9872]

That's still there, very rarely seen though;

An indirect free kick is awarded if a goalkeeper, inside their penalty area, commits any of the following offences:

controls the ball with the hand/arm for more than six seconds before releasing it

Can't remember the last time I saw this awarded.

 

[Sky Blue Harry H]

Obstruction was removed from the laws of the game years ago & replaced with"impeding progress of an opponent" but is basically the same thing

This also drives me mad when a defender spread his arms wide and shoves his arse into reverse, to stop the attacker reaching the ball, whilst trying to let the ball run out for a goal kick. Often the forward tries to run around the defender only to get shoved out of the way/obstructed. Rarely does the defender get penalised. Annoys me!

 

[Frostie]

This also drives me mad when a defender spread his arms wide and shoves his arse into reverse, to stop the attacker reaching the ball, whilst trying to let the ball run out for a goal kick. Often the forward tries to run around the defender only to get shoved out of the way/obstructed. Rarely does the defender get penalised. Annoys me!

Yeah, agreed. It's sort of permitted if the ball is within a playable distance but you're not supposed to use your arms/body like they usually do.
I think the only time this ever gets called is when team in possession is trying to waste time in the corner.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

That's still there, very rarely seen though;

An indirect free kick is awarded if a goalkeeper, inside their penalty area, commits any of the following offences:

controls the ball with the hand/arm for more than six seconds before releasing it

I got a lot of abuse once in a game for awarding one of those to be told ‘this isn’t the fucking Champions League ref’.

 

[Adge]

Obstruction was removed from the laws of the game years ago & replaced with"impeding progress of an opponent" but is basically the same thing. The reason you almost never see it is 99.9% of the time it results in contact &, as others have already alluded to, there is no foul involving contact that can be penalised by an indirect free-kick.

I didn't see the England game live but seen the incident since, penalty & yellow card for dangerous play is correct.

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct

IFAB Laws of the Game

www.thefa.com

You are right in one count “obstruction” is now “impeding an opponent”

But you have been listening to the pundits again I’m afraid regarding “yellow card for dangerous play”
Dangerous play is a red card or “endangering the safety of an opponent” to be more precise.
The pundits also love “it’s reckless so he has to be shown a red card”
A reckless challenge is a yellow card offence.

Taken from IFAB-

• Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned
• Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and/or endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off.

 

[Frostie]

You are right in one count “obstruction” is now “impeding an opponent”

But you have been listening to the pundits again I’m afraid regarding “yellow card for dangerous play”
Dangerous play is a red card or “endangering the safety of an opponent” to be more precise.
The pundits also love “it’s reckless so he has to be shown a red card”
A reckless challenge is a yellow card offence.

Taken from IFAB-

• Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned
• Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and/or endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off.

Pedant

No listening to pundits here mate, most of them (and a lot of players) don't know the laws of the game! See the uproar over Mbappe's Nations League goal & the disgusting abuse Anthony Taylor & team got despite getting it absolutely spot on?

The high boot action itself is classed under dangerous play & would be an indirect free kick but for the contact but you're right, the term reckless is what makes it a yellow card.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Pedant

No listening to pundits here mate, most of them (and a lot of players) don't know the laws of the game! See the uproar over Mbappe's Nations League goal & the disgusting abuse Anthony Taylor & team got despite getting it absolutely spot on?

The high boot action itself is classed under dangerous play & would be an indirect free kick but for the contact but you're right, the term reckless is what makes it a yellow card.

View attachment 22257

That’s a thin line for most bicycle kicks wow

 

[Adge]

Pedant

No listening to pundits here mate, most of them (and a lot of players) don't know the laws of the game! See the uproar over Mbappe's Nations League goal & the disgusting abuse Anthony Taylor & team got despite getting it absolutely spot on?

The high boot action itself is classed under dangerous play & would be an indirect free kick but for the contact but you're right, the term reckless is what makes it a yellow card.

View attachment 22257

Yep-the classic “dangerous play” and an indirect free kick being awarded is the bicycle kick. Another less common example of dangerous play where an indirect free kick would be given is when a player sits on the ball or the ball becomes trapped under the player. This is when the boots would start flying in so would be classed as “dangerous play” and would be awarded against the player sitting on the ball.
So that is “dangerous play” (indirect free kick) which all too often gets mixed up with “endangering the safety of an opponent” which is “excessive force” and would be a straight red card. Again it’s something that the pundits love to get wrong

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Yep-the classic “dangerous play” and an indirect free kick being awarded is the bicycle kick. Another less common example of dangerous play where an indirect free kick would be given is when a player sits on the ball or the ball becomes trapped under the player. This is when the boots would start flying in so would be classed as “dangerous play” and would be awarded against the player sitting on the ball.
So that is “dangerous play” (indirect free kick) which all too often gets mixed up with “endangering the safety of an opponent” which is “excessive force” and would be a straight red card. Again it’s something that the pundits love to get wrong

That part of the laws was always fine with me. What I kept forgetting for the theory tests was the specified pressure of the ball and minimum dimensions of the pitch!

 

[Adge]

Yep-we are not experts by an stretch of the imagination. There are times when we have to look at the Laws to check the odd thing, but of course we are always right when we check!