West Ham v Manchester City

[Will_A]

I work in local authority and we get told "I pay your wages" a lot and I often think to myself by that same vane, I am self-employed then, as I pay the same taxes they claim to pay my wages with...

So my £200 a month council tax goes straight into your pocket...

 

[bloovee]

I think the thread is of interest because football's governors don't seem to know what they want the game to be
The 'Philosophy and Spirit of the Laws' (all of page 11 in essence) is being aggressively eroded. To the extent that the cryptic pamphlet needs a proper rule book written by an outside organisation who are able to structure it properly. Or we just carry on with the status quo of accepting amateurish dabbling with detail

Dare I suggest that the dabbling is professional dabbling with detail?

It's remarkable that so much of the basic law is exactly as it was in 1938, but we have a host of added IFAB decisions / clarifications to try and find some consistency whereas (pre mass TV football and international comparisons) it was all "in the opinion of the referee". But some people do seem to like overthinking issues, or "evolving" the laws to mean something other than the obvious. And we still get inconsistency and controversy.

 

[bloovee]

Comparing this corner kick tactic with two players going off the field but only one taking the throw in a 'normal way' is comparing apples and oranges. One is a deception tactic, the other isn't. Here is a comparable throw in.

In a game where multiball is allowed, two (or even more) players go off the field, each grab a ball and run towards where the ball went out. One of them pretends to throw it in a certain direction to attract defenders but doesn't throw. The other player throws it in another direction. I won't allow this to happen. Would anyone else? Multiple times in a game?

Not everything is directly spelled out in law. Player constantly look for way to gain an advantage over their opponents that are not clear in law. Some are within the spirit of law, some are not. With the ones that are not, if we referees don't take care of it, law clarifications will follow. Pretending to set the ball for a team mate but counting it as the restart at a corner click is a good example. Another is the feint at the end of a runup to a penalty kick. Both used to be within the wording of the lotg but not the spirit of it. Clarification outlawed them after they became widespread.

Still apples and oranges! Trying to confuse opponents with pretend throw-ins isn't like opponents knowing one of two players could be taking a corner. Whereas one player (on the FoP) can touch the ball so it moves and another player can start to run toward goal with it without the opponents realising the corner has been taken. Which is more "deceptive"?

 

[bloovee]

As long as the restart isn't delayed and the other player is back on the FOP when the throw in is taken then all is ok.

I'd liken the 'new' proactive approach at corner kicks to other situations where referees already proactively warn players that, if they stay where they are they might / will commit an offence. This could be standing too close to a defensive wall (not technically an offence until the kick is taken) or standing in an offside position at a free kick with the possibility of blocking a retreating defender. Rather than simply waiting and playing 'gotcha' with players, it's routine to alert them to the fact that their actions are being watched because there is a specific possibility that they might commit an offence.

Consciously leaving the FOP (outside of a normal playing motion and in order to gain an advantage) is overall not allowed. The only new thing that's happening here is that higher level teams are trying their luck with a new corner kick tactic and are simply being warned that it's not acceptable.

Off topic, but would you really warn a player in an offside position they might commit an offence? If they want to risk it, that's their business.

Technically, for these corners you're not warning them, rather that you're not allowing it. Effectively, you're saying one of you has permission to leave the FoP to take the corner and I don't mind which; and if you both stay off the FoP one of you will get a caution - and I'll have to decide which (maybe the one on a second yellow...).

 

[Runner-Ref]

Off topic, but would you really warn a player in an offside position they might commit an offence? If they want to risk it, that's their business.

Technically, for these corners you're not warning them, rather that you're not allowing it. Effectively, you're saying one of you has permission to leave the FoP to take the corner and I don't mind which; and if you both stay off the FoP one of you will get a caution - and I'll have to decide which (maybe the one on a second yellow...).

At the higher levels, its pretty common to warn a player who starts in an offside position at a set piece that they may well be penalised should they stay there. There's a video on YouTube called 'Let The Game Live' which lets you follow and listen in to Ligue 1 referee conversations, I'm pretty sure you see an example of it here.

 

[Runner-Ref]

Dare I suggest that the dabbling is professional dabbling with detail?

It's remarkable that so much of the basic law is exactly as it was in 1938, but we have a host of added IFAB decisions / clarifications to try and find some consistency whereas (pre mass TV football and international comparisons) it was all "in the opinion of the referee". But some people do seem to like overthinking issues, or "evolving" the laws to mean something other than the obvious. And we still get inconsistency and controversy.

I imagine football was a lot simpler back then, but I also imagine life was a lot simpler back then.

Nowadays people expect a lot more and analyse a lot more (media being the biggest reason). I guess a by-product of this, is tweaks and changes to law to try and perfect something that will never be perfect.

As I've said further in the thread; the guidance for this must have been flagged up for a specific reason, rather than someone who had a bit too much time on their hands being fussy. This will likely be clarified in upcoming versions of LOTG.

Someone else mentioned further up in the chain about guidance coming from PGMOL on such matters, and then @GraemeS (I think it was!) mentioned about this meaning only 1% of officials being aware of this. This is something I agree on, and we had a similar conversation about 'deliberate play' on offside a few months ago that went along the same lines before LOTG change clarified it. If PGMOL want to enforce stuff like this, I do think it would be a good idea for them to publicise it more for people a bit further down the ladder. My only thinking behind this way of doing things is that they don't want such small matters being a problem at grassroots. But that's merely a guess!

 

[Russell Jones]

Off topic, but would you really warn a player in an offside position they might commit an offence? If they want to risk it, that's their business.

Technically, for these corners you're not warning them, rather that you're not allowing it. Effectively, you're saying one of you has permission to leave the FoP to take the corner and I don't mind which; and if you both stay off the FoP one of you will get a caution - and I'll have to decide which (maybe the one on a second yellow...).

On point 1, yes absolutely. In exactly the same way as you see referees that warn grappling players in advance of corners actually being taken (so before any offence is committed). At attacking free kicks, intentional blocking of defenders by attackers starting from offside positions has become such a common tactic, that it's better to proactively let them know that they are being closely watched than to deal with the fallout that comes from 'surprisingly' disallowing a seemingly good goal.

On point 2, that seems to be splitting hairs! You're actually warning the players that what they are doing is not allowed .. to help prevent them from 'unknowingly' committing an offence. Much like you warn attacking players standing within 1m of a defensive wall that IF they are there when the kick is taken, an offence will occur.

 

[one]

 

[bloovee]

View attachment 6837

Where does it say to warn players they're in an offside position before the ball is in play? It's not an offence to be in an offside position. You're allowed to be in an offside position and gain an advantage * by being there for a next-phase pass from a player who wasn't offside from the FK.

It might be a tactic to try and obstruct a defender, but then you might get a defender running into a PIOP to make it look like he was interfering.

* As in common parlance, not the limited use in law 11

At the higher levels, its pretty common to warn a player who starts in an offside position at a set piece that they may well be penalised should they stay there. There's a video on YouTube called 'Let The Game Live' which lets you follow and listen in to Ligue 1 referee conversations, I'm pretty sure you see an example of it here.

I didn't see that on the video. The ref getting hit by the ball (23.10) was quite funny.

 

[Runner-Ref]

Where does it say to warn players they're in an offside position before the ball is in play? It's not an offence to be in an offside position. You're allowed to be in an offside position and gain an advantage * by being there for a next-phase pass from a player who wasn't offside from the FK.

It might be a tactic to try and obstruct a defender, but then you might get a defender running into a PIOP to make it look like he was interfering.


I didn't see that on the video. The ref getting hit by the ball (23.10) was quite funny.

It may be on one of the other episodes, but it’s an interesting watch! But in regards to warning players that they may be penalised with offside, this was common to do on the National League and higher (and still is)

 

[Russell Jones]

Where does it say to warn players they're in an offside position before the ball is in play? It's not an offence to be in an offside position. You're allowed to be in an offside position and gain an advantage * by being there for a next-phase pass from a player who wasn't offside from the FK.

It might be a tactic to try and obstruct a defender, but then you might get a defender running into a PIOP to make it look like he was interfering.


I didn't see that on the video. The ref getting hit by the ball (23.10) was quite funny.

Pulling the various threads together, I think there's a pretty clear picture emerges. As time goes by, teams try out creative new ways to bend the rules. This either starts at the top of the game or becomes more high profile when first seen on TV. As a result, PGMOL quite rightly intervene to alert their workforce and recommend how best to consistently deal with things at that level. Whilst this may well eventually filter down into law or guidance at other levels, that's not really the concern of PGMOL, as it's not their remit. Until that happens, other referees are at liberty to deal with the 'creativity' as they see fit ... that said, in a world where grassroots players and public perception are heavily influenced by what is seen on TV, probably no harm in 'falling into line', as long as you are comfortable it's defensible in current law.

Players standing in offside positions at ceremonial free kicks to block defenders is just one of these pieces of 'creativity'. It's certainly not mandatory for officials to warn them (as you say, they may never go on to commit an offence) ... it's just current recommended PGMOL / FIFA referee guidance.

 

[one]

Can anyone remember the trend after the change in law putting the ball in play immediately in play after a goal kick? Keeper flips it to a near defender who chests it back into the keepers hand. We even had debate here with some for and some against it. IFAB quashed that pretty quickly and it took a couple of years before it made its way into law. But I guess it would have been ok if City did it

 

[bloovee]

I resist the temptation to cite all the law changes / clarifications that have arisen from City matches (or policy changes that have never been applied again). In fact it's a good job this thread is about a "pro-active" rule that meant West Ham's Ward-Prowse was stopped from taking one of his specialist corners.

 

[santa sangria]

I resist the temptation to cite all the law changes / clarifications that have arisen from City matches (or policy changes that have never been applied again). In fact it's a good job this thread is about a "pro-active" rule that meant West Ham's Ward-Prowse was stopped from taking one of his specialist corners.

I can help here… hang on… I’ll count them for you… and the magic number is 115 !

(Thanks for teeing me up for that one)

 

[socal lurker]

Can anyone remember the trend after the change in law putting the ball in play immediately in play after a goal kick? Keeper flips it to a near defender who chests it back into the keepers hand. We even had debate here with some for and some against it. IFAB quashed that pretty quickly and it took a couple of years before it made its way into law. But I guess it would have been ok if City did it

Except that trickery was already in the Laws when they did that. The R could have given an IFK under existing Laws, but just told them not to do it again. And “don’t do it again” became specific guidance, with the las clarified further the next year thay it would be an IFK. (The real “innovation” was when the “pass back“ Law was new and disn’t have the trickery language, which came the following year.)

 

[Peter Grove]

(The real “innovation” was when the “pass back“ Law was new and disn’t have the trickery language, which came the following year.)

Just to mention, although it obviously couldn't make it into the full laws document till the following year, the "deliberate trick to circumvent the law" wording was actually adopted the same year that the "backpass" law came in, in an emergency circular that was issued within a month of that season's laws coming into effect.

This was because players wasted no time in finding the loophole in the law and starting to exploit it, necessitating the issuing of FIFA Circular Number 488 on July 24, 1992, just 24 days after the new laws for the 1992 season had come into force.