Advantage from offside...
- Thread starter RegalRef
- Start date
CapnBloodbeard
RefChat Addict
Anyway, of course advantage can apply from offside. If an offside attacker touches the ball but the keeper catches it instead, are you blowing offside or allowing play to continue (of course it depends how far upfield the infringement occurred)?
Even if we may not call out 'advantage', the spirit of advantage is still relevant.
You made the right decision with penalising the deliberate handling. Nobody could argue any different.
Your statement is incorrect against both the letter of the law and the spirit of the game (why on earth would you caution somebody for an action where they've only disadvantaged themselves, and not attempted to gain any benefit or influence the opposition?)
Even if we may not call out 'advantage', the spirit of advantage is still relevant.
You made the right decision with penalising the deliberate handling. Nobody could argue any different.
Read your additional advice then get back to us. I could tell you what it says but I think you'll benefit more from looking it up yourself.
Your statement is incorrect against both the letter of the law and the spirit of the game (why on earth would you caution somebody for an action where they've only disadvantaged themselves, and not attempted to gain any benefit or influence the opposition?)
Peter Grove
RefChat Addict
Why not? As xPositor pointed out earlier, advantage can be applied to any offence. Which part of the law precludes offside offences from the advantage clause?
Since this debate was started by @RegalRef in an U18's game, I thought we were talking at football at lower levels.
- Yes @joe cunningham , Premiership referees can signal advantage from offsides (but as we all know, they do their own things anyway)!
- @Russell Jones - it may be advantageous, but is that Advantage within the Laws of the Game. Where is the "enhanced attacking potential", what you said is simply procession they kick it further. Advantage would be if they could kick to your "wide-open forward" for a run on goal!
- Also, if you apply advantage - the defenders quickly lose the ball, you should go back and award the original free-kick. Good luck with Match Control on that issue.
- @Peter Grove @xPositor - nothing in the Laws precludes advantage per say. It is either no offence occurs (he stops running) or the team obtain procession. The infringement of offside exists when you blow the whistle to stop the game. It is just stupid to say to a goalkeeper - Advantage when he collects the ball and the offence was on the half-way line. The first comment is "where is the advantage", closely followed by "what about the one 10 minutes ago, when I was through" (and you missed it). It is just ugly refereeing... So much easier to go "Keeping Going keeper, you have it".
Russell Jones
RefChat Addict
Hmmm, interesting debate. And I have to say I'm not convinced. To continue with your analogy, offside player heads the ball and it goes into the arms of the keeper. You think he's got it under control so shout for him to keep going .. but it slips out of his grasp and the offside attacker scores a goal. I'm guessing you're going to bring it back for the original offside offence, exactly as you would have done in a more standard 'Advantage' situation. So why on earth complicate things by deciding that Offside is somehow fundamentally different and needs to be handled in a unique way?
And relating to your second point, a GK being able to kick it further into the opposition half IS enhanced attacking potential, not simply possession (as well as being less stop start, keeping the game flowing)
I think the crux of the issue is your assertion that "The infringement of offside exists when you blow the whistle to stop the game". This differentiates offside from all other offences .. and yet you admit that there is nothing in Law which backs this up ....
While I don't have any issue with the theory of giving advantage against an offside (and am pretty sure I've done so myself in the past), I'm starting to come round to the idea that most of the time, it's just unnecessary.
If you're thinking of giving advantage, chances are the attacker could be argued to have not interfered with play, however close to the ball they actually get. And on the occasions where the attacker gets a touch on the ball but it still goes through to an opponent, they'd usually be happier with a stationary free kick and associated territory anyway, rather than another defender having to control the ball and play it out or it going all the way back to the keeper.
If you're thinking of giving advantage, chances are the attacker could be argued to have not interfered with play, however close to the ball they actually get. And on the occasions where the attacker gets a touch on the ball but it still goes through to an opponent, they'd usually be happier with a stationary free kick and associated territory anyway, rather than another defender having to control the ball and play it out or it going all the way back to the keeper.
RegalRef
Politically Incorrect
So to summarise the comments from all...
Please learn from my misfortune in this particular example and if somebody raises a flag and you see it, give it (unless the ball is going through to the keeper unchallenged).
On reflection and following this debate, while nobody could account for the stupidity of just picking the ball up, the wise thing to do is award the offside 99% of the time as soon as poss.
If fate goes against you in a random way it can change the game, when the decision you made actually had little if any benefit to the defending team or the game.
Please learn from my misfortune in this particular example and if somebody raises a flag and you see it, give it (unless the ball is going through to the keeper unchallenged).
On reflection and following this debate, while nobody could account for the stupidity of just picking the ball up, the wise thing to do is award the offside 99% of the time as soon as poss.
If fate goes against you in a random way it can change the game, when the decision you made actually had little if any benefit to the defending team or the game.
THIS
I'd do it exactly the same way and I'd penalise any referee who didn't. The player didn't play to the whistle. There can't have been an offside offence (player in an offside position, yes, but no offside offence). Some people on here are demonstrating their lack of understanding of the offside law, the nature of football and how players try to make you look stupid.
Doh! Multiquote rules
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
...or give the advantage signal quicker and very clearly and audibly... Unfortunately, I think you have let down the team in possession here. You were thinking advantage but hadn't signalled, so for the player about to pick up the ball, they are in the dark. Penalising the player seems incredibly harsh in this case.
This does also show up a weakness with advantage law in football. The timing of the signal, time before the signal, and time after signal are grey. It would be much better - more transparent to everyone if, like egg chasing, we could instantly signal advantage, and then have 5-10 seconds to still stop play for the original offence if the advantage does not materialise.
This does also show up a weakness with advantage law in football. The timing of the signal, time before the signal, and time after signal are grey. It would be much better - more transparent to everyone if, like egg chasing, we could instantly signal advantage, and then have 5-10 seconds to still stop play for the original offence if the advantage does not materialise.
Have you read the previous posts? THERE IS NO ADVANTAGE, IT IS THE REFEREE DECIDING NOT TO STOP THE GAME BECAUSE HE ISN'T OBLIGED TO WHEN AN ASSISTANT SIGNALS
I refer the learned gentleman to the post immediately above his.
richard ramjane
RefChat Addict
I still reckon the flag was too quick 
I refer the learned gentleman to the post below his.
Also
Law 5
stops, suspends or abandons the match, at his discretion, for any infringements of the Laws
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
Brian, the OP states in the first post, he (or she) was "about to give the big arms and shout advantage".
This starts to feel quite grey, along with the fact that the OP is writing to analyse this...
Your point is interesting. When does advantage start? What is this time between the incident and the signal of advantage, even though the referee is thinking "advantage"? Is there an "offence" "active" during this time? I think there is. I think you can go back to the offside and not penalise the handball... and sell it... it's all about timing though...
That's where the OP was wrong. He was right to continue play but wrong to consider it as "advantage"
RegalRef
Politically Incorrect
Have I just read that correctly??
All 3 of those statements are absolute rubbish!!