Advantage - offside

[BlindButFair]

I had a tricky situation in a match on the weekend. This was my 6th match as a centre.

Attacking team is down by 1 goal and we're approaching full time. Defender holds the attacker a few yards out of the penalty area, I wait, attacker shrugs him off and plays a nice ball through to his teammate who's well inside the PA. I signal and yell advantage. The teammate and a different defender challenge for the ball, it pops over the goal line, I look over at the club AR to confirm my impression of goal kick and ... his flag is up for offside. Bugger.

What to do in this situation? According to the LOTG if the anticipated advantage doesn't develop I can bring the play back. But in the written advice from my local FA (in Australia) they say this (emphasis mine):
"The referee must signal advantage, as well as yell it out. The referee has a few seconds to decide whether they wish to play advantage or stop play for the foul... Once advantage has been played, the foul cannot be brought back."

So, I didn't bring it back but instead gave an IFK for the offside offence. This caused a lot of consternation for the attacking team, and led to some polite but frustrated words from their coach after the match.

Interested in people's thoughts as to whether I should have brought it back for a free kick (acknowledging my local FA advice), argued that the advantage had already accrued since he was able to play the pass, or done something else different?

(Fundamentally I think the mistake I made was to signal advantage too quickly - and if I'd been a bit wider I probably would have spotted the AR's flag earlier)

 

[CaptainsPlease]

I think being able to play the ball in is the point at which the advantage has accrued, if in the circumstances that is more advantageous than awarding the free kick. So signal advantage even earlier when the attacker shrugs off the challenge and is about to play the ball.

 

[JamesL]

Depends on time between the foul and the pass.
Where it's immediate, or almost immediately after the foul the advantage hasn't ensued i.e. there was no benefit to the attacking team by allowing play to continue so I would penalise the foul instead.
If there's been some time between and play has continued "for a few seconds" then you can't really bring it back.
It's like with every advantage, giving yourself a moment or so to establish is there a benefit to the attacking team before deciding to penalise or continue playing

 

[one]

Being from Australia my opinion counts here . They do advantage differently in the UK.

Did you signal advantage after the pass or before it? (Ideally you should have done as soon as he broke free likely before the pass)

If you signalled before the pass then passing to an offside player is their problem and goal kick it is.

If you signalled after it, you played advantage on something that was really not an advantage. Your mistake. I would bring it back for a free kick despite the advice here in Australia.

 

[BlindButFair]

Thanks. I can't honestly remember when I signalled in relation to the pass! I suspect it was probably after. I wish I had a video of the incident to be honest (I also suspect the club AR, who was doing that role for the first time, may have got the offside call wrong).

 

[GraemeS]

I usually think of advantage in terms of how helpful is the next significant action after the foul is - in this case, the pass is what matters and if it's directed to an offside player, it's clearly not more advantageous than the FK would have been. Even more so if the foul is the reason for the pass being delayed and why the player has drifted offside!

If he's shrugged off the attacker, taken a few moments or run forward a little bit then I think that constitutes the significant action, but if the pass is almost immediate (as it sounds like from the description), I'd be coming back for that.

The idea that signalling advantage locks that decision in stone is I think a little outdated and doesn't reflect what players actually expect. I've shouted "Advantage" and then immediately blown my whistle a few times, it's never more contentious than it has been when I've chosen to stick with an iffy advantage call.

 

[one]

The idea that signalling advantage locks that decision in stone is I think a little outdated and doesn't reflect what players actually expect. I've shouted "Advantage" and then immediately blown my whistle a few times, it's never more contentious than it has been when I've chosen to stick with an iffy advantage call.

The way advantage is taught here, if you signal advantage and then bring it back, then you have made a mistake in signalling advantage too early. Bringing it back is correcting your own mistake really rather than an option.

 

[GraemeS]

The way advantage is taught here, if you signal advantage and then bring it back, then you have made a mistake in signalling advantage too early. Bringing it back is correcting your own mistake really rather than an option.

Agree it's sometimes taught that way, disagree that this approach actually makes any sense or actually reflects how football expects advantage to be used

 

[socal lurker]

The way advantage is taught here, if you signal advantage and then bring it back, then you have made a mistake in signalling advantage too early. Bringing it back is correcting your own mistake really rather than an option.

The good old two theories on when to signal, which is not directed from the magic book.

In the OP, I think the core substantive question is whether

1. The R recognized an advantageous situation from the fouled attacker having the ball in a position in which that attacker individually had an advantage better than the free kick, and the attacker fluffed the advantage by making the poor choice to pass the ball to an OS teammate; or
2. The the attacker himself did not have an advantage, but the R saw an advantage in that the attacker could pass to the teammate, who the R did not know at the time was OS.

In the first scenario within the R's head, the advantage was there and the player wasted it, and the play should stand. In the second, there never was any advantage and the FK needs to be given.

IMHO, in the second scenario, even under the Australian teaching on timing of signalling, the FK should be given, as the R made a mistake in signaling the advantage, as he was unaware of the OSP nature of the attacker, which meant there was no advantage. And, of course, an R can correct a mistake on his own or with advice form an AR at any time before play restarts.

(As an aside, the Australian teaching seems a bit outdated (or perhaps poorly written by being overly simplistic) to me and not consistent with the language in the modern Laws about bringing it back.

 

[one]

The good old two theories on when to signal, which is not directed from the magic book.

In the OP, I think the core substantive question is whether

1. The R recognized an advantageous situation from the fouled attacker having the ball in a position in which that attacker individually had an advantage better than the free kick, and the attacker fluffed the advantage by making the poor choice to pass the ball to an OS teammate; or
2. The the attacker himself did not have an advantage, but the R saw an advantage in that the attacker could pass to the teammate, who the R did not know at the time was OS.

In the first scenario within the R's head, the advantage was there and the player wasted it, and the play should stand. In the second, there never was any advantage and the FK needs to be given.

IMHO, in the second scenario, even under the Australian teaching on timing of signalling, the FK should be given, as the R made a mistake in signaling the advantage, as he was unaware of the OSP nature of the attacker, which meant there was no advantage. And, of course, an R can correct a mistake on his own or with advice form an AR at any time before play restarts.

(As an aside, the Australian teaching seems a bit outdated (or perhaps poorly written by being overly simplistic) to me and not consistent with the language in the modern Laws about bringing it back.

I think this is an overcomplicated way of saying the same thing as I am.

the attacker himself did not have an advantage, but the R saw an advantage in that...

Basically bringing play back means correcting a referee error n misjudging an advantage, but not give the attacker a second chance because they did not take 'advantage' of a better opportunity.

 

[Kes]

Advantage is always one of those "damned if you do etc" situations it seems.

For me, I've been trying to get into the habit (recently) of just giving it a slightly longer pause before either signalling advantage or blowing up.
Having said that, (and I know there are those on here who disagree) if I've called advantage too early and it doesn't actually accrue, then I've no problem bringing it back for the FK that I should have given, in spite of any protestations.

Technically not always the right thing to do but morally I don't think a team that has been "fouled against" should dip out just because I've made a poor refereeing (advantage) call ...

 

[DazN]

I had a situation in a recent game (my 2nd!) where there was a defensive handball with a potential advantage for the attacking team so I didn’t blow immediately (having just been taught to delay calling advantage a week earlier!) The advantage quickly broke down so I blew for the initial HB just as one of the players turned to give me a right mouthful… I explained that I was seeing if his team had an advantage and he looked shocked, as if he couldn’t comprehend that a referee was capable of such a thing!

 

[wazztie16]

Advantage is always one of those "damned if you do etc" situations it seems.

For me, I've been trying to get into the habit (recently) of just giving it a slightly longer pause before either signalling advantage or blowing up.

I do this, I did a game once and afterwards one of the teams said they'd never known a referee blow so late for fouls. I think they lost about 8-1, iirc, never had it since or before, and I've done an awful lot of games in 5 seasons.

 

[wazztie16]

I had a situation in a recent game (my 2nd!) where there was a defensive handball with a potential advantage for the attacking team so I didn’t blow immediately (having just been taught to delay calling advantage a week earlier!) The advantage quickly broke down so I blew for the initial HB just as one of the players turned to give me a right mouthful… I explained that I was seeing if his team had an advantage and he looked shocked, as if he couldn’t comprehend that a referee was capable of such a thing!

Maybe he's not used to a decent ref