A&H

Player kicks 2nd ball at opponent to stop an attack

Ref X

Ref X

RefChat Addict
Grassroots Referee
https://www.reddit.com/r/soccer/comments/13o1pw4

Law 12: If a player who is on or off the field of play throws or kicks an object (other than the match ball) at an opposing player, or throws or kicks an object (including a ball) at an opposing substitute, substituted or sent-off player, team official, or a match official or the match ball, play is restarted with a direct free kick from the position where the object struck or would have struck the person or the ball. If this position is off the field of play, the free kick is taken on the nearest point on the boundary line; a penalty kick is awarded if this is within the offender’s penalty area.

Result is a caution and DFK from where the 2 balls collided.

Wild!
 
The Referee Store
Ref X said:
https://www.reddit.com/r/soccer/comments/13o1pw4

Law 12: If a player who is on or off the field of play throws or kicks an object (other than the match ball) at an opposing player, or throws or kicks an object (including a ball) at an opposing substitute, substituted or sent-off player, team official, or a match official or the match ball, play is restarted with a direct free kick from the position where the object struck or would have struck the person or the ball. If this position is off the field of play, the free kick is taken on the nearest point on the boundary line; a penalty kick is awarded if this is within the offender’s penalty area.

Result is a caution and DFK from where the 2 balls collided.

Wild!
Click to expand...
Hmm, two cautions? One for kicking the ball at the ball, and another because it is SPA?


just kidding . . .
 
socal lurker said:
Hmm, two cautions? One for kicking the ball at the ball, and another because it is SPA?


just kidding . . .
Click to expand...
Why stop at two cautions? Also give two free kicks 😊

This is the perfect example of two offences at the same time. Sanction and restart is the same so take a pick.

What I see wrong in this specific incident is that it seems he is talking to VAR to get information / direction before he makes a decision which is completely wrong. He is covering his mouth when communicating on the mic which I don't see a reason for as well.
 
Last edited:
one said:
What I see wrong in this specific incident is that it seems he is talking to VAR to get information / direction before he makes a decision which is completely wrong. He is covering his mouth when communicating on the mic which I don't see a reason for as well.
Click to expand...

Why are you assuming he is talking to the VAR rather than his on-field teammates? And even if he is talking to the VAR, why are you assuming that he is getting information or direction rather than telling the VAR what the on-field decision is?

He certainly could be breaching video review protocols, but the fact he is talking on the headset certainly isn't enough information from which to draw that conclusion.
 
This is why referees need to know all laws, no matter how obscure they are. That situation will probably never happen to all of us, and this referee probably thought the same, but it has happened and he got to the right outcome. Whether that was from his knowledge or that of a colleague isn't really here nor there, they got it right and the ramifications of getting it wrong could have been huge.
 
RustyRef said:
This is why referees need to know all laws, no matter how obscure they are.
Click to expand...
100%. Very important to continue to be a student of the LOTG.

Recently worked a youth game in which there was a double touch by the same player during a FK. Gave a FK the other way but forgot it was supposed to be an IFK, not a DFK. Only remember when the coach asked me before the kick, "Is this direct or indirect?"

Gave the IFK but wouldn't have if I hadn't gotten lucky with the coach reminding me with his question.

Just one of those things I'd never actually experienced before in a real game but now that I have, I'll know it next time.

Next step is to make sure I'm getting all these edge cases right the first time I see them. Time to get my nose back in the books!
 
socal lurker said:
Why are you assuming he is talking to the VAR rather than his on-field teammates?
Click to expand...
Educated guess. Body language etc. Agree that he could have been talking to other onfield officials but unlikely.


socal lurker said:
And even if he is talking to the VAR, why are you assuming that he is getting information or direction rather than telling the VAR what the on-field decision is?
Click to expand...
Hmmm. So are you saying he can make a decision without communicating it to anyone but the VAR. Then VAR checks and either confirm, recommend a review or suggest a different outcome. Then the outcome can be communicated to the players? I very much doubt this is what ifab meant in the protocol by say referees must make a decision before any VAR recommendation.
 
Peter Grove said:
Not sure why that would be unlikely. Match officials talk to each other over the headsets all the time during a game.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. Again, to me it very much looked like a chat to VAR. The fact that this happened on the far side to all other on-field officials, all further away from him to the incident contributes to my opinion. The fact that he covered his mouth also contributed. I do understand he could have just been asking other on-field officials, I have seen this, don't know the restart, does either of you know?

If you have read some/most of 7Kplus posts here which I guess you probably have, you would know I am cynical by nature :D


RefJef said:
He could have been checking with VAR to see if the balls collided inside or outside the penalty area?
Click to expand...
This conversation can only happen after a decision is made by the referee and 'publicly' communicated. Not too dissimilar when a foul happens on the edge of the area. Referee stops play and either gives a free kick or a penalty kick. Then wait for a check by VAR or asks VAR for a in/out check. Stopping play for the foul but then asking VAR to check in/out (find the restart) can be disastrous if there is no conclusive evidence for VAR to give it one way or other.
 
one said:
Educated guess. Body language etc. Agree that he could have been talking to other onfield officials but unlikely.



Hmmm. So are you saying he can make a decision without communicating it to anyone but the VAR. Then VAR checks and either confirm, recommend a review or suggest a different outcome. Then the outcome can be communicated to the players? I very much doubt this is what ifab meant in the protocol by say referees must make a decision before any VAR recommendation.
Click to expand...

He should still be communicating the decision on the field before the VAR checks, but that doesn't mean he can't tell the VAR--"I have it outside the PA, but please be sure to check that, as it was close from my angle."

one said:
This conversation can only happen after a decision is made by the referee and 'publicly' communicated. Not too dissimilar when a foul happens on the edge of the area. Referee stops play and either gives a free kick or a penalty kick. Then wait for a check by VAR or asks VAR for a in/out check. Stopping play for the foul but then asking VAR to check in/out (find the restart) can be disastrous if there is no conclusive evidence for VAR to give it one way or other.
Click to expand...
While I agree that is the better way to manage, I'm not sure that the public communication is actually mandated in the protocols. I would think the VAR certainly shouldn't be giving any input until the public communication, but I'm not convinced that he can't tell the VAR first. (Though I still think it is more likely he is conversing with his on field team. )
 
socal lurker said:
He should still be communicating the decision on the field before the VAR checks, but that doesn't mean he can't tell the VAR--"I have it outside the PA, but please be sure to check that, as it was close from my angle."


While I agree that is the better way to manage, I'm not sure that the public communication is actually mandated in the protocols. I would think the VAR certainly shouldn't be giving any input until the public communication, but I'm not convinced that he can't tell the VAR first. (Though I still think it is more likely he is conversing with his on field team. )
Click to expand...
Have you seen the full footage? It's a 'full on' conversation. From the moment ball was out of play until the yellow card was shown it took 75 seconds then he pointed for a free kick. Every time they showed the referee during that time he was talking into the mic or had the body language of trying to isolate himself to listen in. There was no indication of headset communication after the yellow card and free kick was given. His initial body language was that he wasn't even going for a free kkick.Though I can't be certain, this is a if it sounds like a duck type of thing.

Anyway, the final decision was right. But does the end justify the means?
 
one said:
Anyway, the final decision was right. But does the end justify the means?
Click to expand...
Not if he was getting input from the VAR. If he was getting input from the VAR, it should be only after the decision and should be accompanied by the TV signal. But we still don't know he was talking to the VAR rather than the three on field teammates, which could be for lots of things. Did the trail AR have an angle for a better view on in/out of PA? Did the lead AR have an opinion on SPA vs DOGSO? Did any of three see the extra ball interfering so play should have been stopped before the offense occurred? And being sure he had the rules right on a ball kicked at another ball/opponent, which is an unusual scenario. I'm just not willing to join you in assuming there was a very series breach of VAR protocol. It the VAR was advising him before the decision was made on the field, we should expect both of them to be missing assignments in the immediate future, as that would be an extreme breach.
 
Almost a philiosophical debate. If a defender going to cover finds an extra ball in his path, is the ball not interfering with play? So the referee should have stopped play and restarted with a dropped ball. You might think the defender could have kicked it straight out rather than the brilliant cannon shot at the match ball or maybe he just miscued. At least, that's what I'd spend a minute discussing with colleagues...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top