The Ref Stop

Merseyside Derby

Donate to RefChat

Help keep RefChat running, any donation would be appreciated

S

spuddy1878

RefChat Addict
I actually thought Darren England had a good 75 mins or so but last 15 was baffling.

He stopped Everton taking three quick free kicks , don't think he was talking to another player at any time but camera angle might show different.

The question i ask is, Dewsbury Hall was shown a yellow card for I don't know what, what law could the referee possibly have shown a yellow card for ?
 
The Ref Stop
He'd told them to wait for the whistle, when the referee has done that you can't take the free kick. Contrary to what the media have ranted about, the caution wasn't for taking the free kick too quickly, it was for dissent after he shouted and waved his arms around after the free kick was stopped.
 
spuddy1878 said:
what law could the referee possibly have shown a yellow card for ?
Click to expand...
Haven't seen the incident and @RustyRef could well be right. However in general, Law 12 allows the referee to caution for any act he deems unsporting behaviour, regardless of if the act has been mentioned in any law.
 
We had this question in our online LOTG test last season…. (I know, because I didn’t know it was specified in law and I got it wrong 😆)
 
So if the refs whistle isn't needed on most free kicks (generally needed when a team organisers a wall) why wasn't he allowed to carry on
 
spuddy1878 said:
So if the refs whistle isn't needed on most free kicks (generally needed when a team organisers a wall) why wasn't he allowed to carry on
Click to expand...
Because he'd told him to wait. For some reason when a free kick is about to be played into the penalty area the PGMOL referees speak to players who are stood in an offside position and from memory he was doing that here. There's also the referee's positioning to think about, if he lets them take it quickly and they immediately clump it into the area he's going to be hopelessly out of position.

There had also been an earlier free kick taken too quickly and I'm pretty sure he warned him there. If a referee warns someone not to do something and he does it again there's probably an argument that it could be dissent by action. I once sent a player off for this, twice I'd told him to wait for the whistle and twice he took it anyway, so I told him if he did it again he would get his second caution (he was already on one for a reckless challenge). He did it again 5 minutes later so off he went, sometimes players just think they can do what they want.
 
spuddy1878 said:
So a referee stopped one team not both taking a quick free kick not in a shooting position three times
Click to expand...
Yes, but I don't think you are getting this. On each occasion he had told them to wait for the whistle, it really isn't that complicated an instruction for the players to follow.
 
spuddy1878 said:
So a referee stopped one team not both taking a quick free kick not in a shooting position three times
Click to expand...
So, you’ve given up on the main original idea (caution wrong in law). And now questioning why Everton could not ‘go quick as they wished’.

First occasion, 69”. Foul on Grealish results in Liverpool caution, so never going to be truly quick. Everton choose to set up with three players in offside positions and referee decides to proactively manage this (entirely normal procedure). Everton attempt to take kick before this process is complete, with referee not in position and whistle not blown

Second occasion, 77”. Player from each team slightly injured and on ground so no chance of truly quick kick. Again, Everton set up with 5 players on edge of area, so referee needs to be positioned for the expected delivery to this area. Kick is taken before referee in position and before whistle is blown.

In between, a Liverpool FK, 73”, also taken on the whistle.

Net, net, none of these free kicks were ever going to be taken before the referee was happy and the whistle was blown. So nothing to see there. For completeness, just because the ensuing caution is supported / recommended, I’m not sure it was truly needed … the wasted time would probably have been punishment enough for a team chasing the game.
 
While I agree with above isn't the team taking the freekick supposed to have a slight advantage when infact its the defending team (Liverpool) who are able to get men behind the ball.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Exactly ! Why make them wait for the whistle and take their advantage away. The one I saw on the TV was played short !
 
I get it from a match control POV. I’ve asked you to do this, so don’t a) not do that, b) inflame the situation, c) cause an incident.

But never feels allll that fair that someone’s clattered 19 yards out and cos a keeper yells WALL within a nanosecond, the expectation is that we spend another minute setting up the perfect wall so the chances of scoring are minimal.

Thats Law though, so tough titties. I just do what I’m told 😂
 
Archer said:
I get it from a match control POV. I’ve asked you to do this, so don’t a) not do that, b) inflame the situation, c) cause an incident.

But never feels allll that fair that someone’s clattered 19 yards out and cos a keeper yells WALL within a nanosecond, the expectation is that we spend another minute setting up the perfect wall so the chances of scoring are minimal.

Thats Law though, so tough titties. I just do what I’m told 😂
Click to expand...
Well, no. The GK yelling “wall” absolutely does not require the R to stop a quick kick. Nor does the Law require we give the team as much time as it wants to set the wall. But current practice is that once the R intervenes to make it on the whistle, the defense gets reasonable time to set the defense. But I do think current practice in many places is sometimes too aggressive on making things on the whistle. Even up close, a team that actually goes quickly should be permitted to do so (unless other factors are present such as a caution or checking on an injury). But once it doesn’t happen quickly, the R should, consistent with expectations, make it ceremonial. (It hurts my brain when Rs say they will never allow a quick free kick within 30 yards of the goal. IMO they are in fact denying a team an opportunity the Law gives them.) I’d also note that recent IfAB changes about discipline were intended to make for more quick kick opportunities.
 
I do wish the TV companies put up the law which seems to of back up the referees decision instead of pundits just lambasting the referee for not showing common sense.
 
socal lurker said:
I do think current practice in many places is sometimes too aggressive on making things on the whistle.
Click to expand...
Oh aye, I'm a more observant ref than my slightly sarcastic rant implied don't worry 🤪

Paul_10 said:
I do wish the TV companies put up the law which seems to of back up the referees decision instead of pundits just lambasting the referee for not showing common sense.
Click to expand...
Then they'll moan about not being consistent when someone does show common sense. no win / no win

:D
 
socal lurker said:
Well, no. The GK yelling “wall” absolutely does not require the R to stop a quick kick. Nor does the Law require we give the team as much time as it wants to set the wall.
Click to expand...
Come on Socal... You're not new around here...
 
What are peoples thoughts on the additional time of 3 mins in the 2nd period, when there was plenty of timewasting and about 6 substitutions ?
 
RustyRef said:
Yes, but I don't think you are getting this. On each occasion he had told them to wait for the whistle, it really isn't that complicated an instruction for the players to follow.
Click to expand...
I think spuddy's point was, why is he asking them to wait for the whistle when it's just a quick free kick, though ? it's taking the advantage away from the attacking team
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top