The Ref Stop

QFK after SPA

Donate to RefChat

Help keep RefChat running, any donation would be appreciated

one

one

RefChat Addict
I thought maybe a separate thread for this.

4 on 2 in a counter attack. Defender carelessly (or recklessly) bring down the attacker with ball. Its a clear SPA. You can't play advantage as defender will get the to the ball first if play continues. You blow the whistle and run in to caution defender. The attacker gets up in a flash, puts the ball in the right place (its already there anyway) and takes the FK. Still 4 on 2 with a good chance of a goal.

Whats the correct thing to do? Forget about the caution and let the attackers make the best of their 4 on 2 or bring play back and caution the defender?

PS: For me this the type of situation QFKs are destined for, to allow attackers continue with their numerical/positional advantage. Not for a "gotchya" surprise.
 
The Ref Stop
Yeah, let that roll and book him afterwards.

That's probably way wrong but can't you book a player after the advantage has gone? (IE after the ball has gone out of play or there's a stoppage.)

Isn't a QFK just a different type of 'advantage'?
 
The short answer is NO. IMO, in law that is more wrong (less right) than the two options I mentioned. The only time you can caution (or send-off) a player is in the FIRST stoppage after the offence. VAR has changed that a bit but we are not playing with VAR here :)
 
one said:
The short answer is NO. IMO, in law that is more wrong (less right) than the two options I mentioned. The only time you can caution (or send-off) a player is in the FIRST stoppage after the offence. VAR has changed that a bit but we are not playing with VAR here :)
Click to expand...

Like I said probably way wrong.
 
Murri O said:
Yeah, let that roll and book him afterwards.

That's probably way wrong but can't you book a player after the advantage has gone? (IE after the ball has gone out of play or there's a stoppage.)

Isn't a QFK just a different type of 'advantage'?
Click to expand...
Yes, it's wrong. A QFK isn't an advantage - it's a restart. Play restarting changes a lot.
You need to issue the card.
If it's a borderline card, you could consider whether it's worth foregoing the card (technically incorrect) and allowing things to continue, but if it really needs to be given then you have to intervene.
If considering to just forget the card, you need to consider how your body and whistle language may have already affected the situation. For instance, if you've done a series of tweets, then perhaps you can't really sell the idea of 'you weren't going to card him'.
 
So can you come back and caution a player after the advantage has played out if a free hasn't been given? (If there were a foul that is. Say, grabbed his shirt to break up the attack but the player broke free.)
 
Murri O said:
So can you come back and caution a player after the advantage has played out if a free hasn't been given? (If there were a foul that is. Say, grabbed his shirt to break up the attack but the player broke free.)
Click to expand...


You are describing just a typical advantage, which you can indeed return to the offender and caution when the ball is next dead. If am reading your post correctly

If say it runs out for goal kick and keeper takes if quick and you are not tuned in, then, play has restarted and you cannot by the lotg go back for the caution.
 
Ciley Myrus said:
You are describing just a typical advantage, which you can indeed return to the offender and caution when the ball is next dead. If am reading your post correctly

If say it runs out for goal kick and keeper takes if quick and you are not tuned in, then, play has restarted and you cannot by the lotg go back for the caution.
Click to expand...

That's what I thought. Shame though, as you say, in the above incident by the OP you couldn't let it play out and then book him.
 
Once the referee decides to caution or send of a player, play must not be restarted until the sanction has been administered. Thst much is clear.

I see your angle here that delaying play to administer the caution could almost penalise the offended team as they lose out on their advantageous position.

However, there is an argument that the caution becomes an advantage for the remainder of the game. As the player cant make any mistakes that may lead to a caution.. example player is less likely to attempt a risky challenge that they may or may not get away with as the sanction for making that mistake becomes much worse.
 
Ciley Myrus said:
I would hope I would never let play restart without the caution. I can only think if it ever did happen then yes, next time that player breaks wind, he going in the book.
Click to expand...

Out of interest and hand on heart this is a serious question, if a player was to break wind whilst u was talking to him NOT booking him just talking to him regarding his conduct etc or giving him a warning..

What would u do?
 
CapnBloodbeard said:
Yes, it's wrong. A QFK isn't an advantage - it's a restart. Play restarting changes a lot.
You need to issue the card.
If it's a borderline card, you could consider whether it's worth foregoing the card (technically incorrect) and allowing things to continue, but if it really needs to be given then you have to intervene.
If considering to just forget the card, you need to consider how your body and whistle language may have already affected the situation. For instance, if you've done a series of tweets, then perhaps you can't really sell the idea of 'you weren't going to card him'.
Click to expand...

Just wondering... (this is for everyone though);

Would you think it is acceptable to not issue the card if the QFK would result in an obvious goal-scoring opportunity?

I feel if that ever happened on the field it would be a dilemma of sorts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top