Russell Jones
RefChat Addict
The clip is a beautiful example of why the law change was introduced in the first place.
.
Law 5 Clarification
- Thread starter norfolkref
- Start date
.
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
Oh the irony. When they insist something is clear when it isn't, one can't be blamed to think that IFAB are the ones taking it personally
But this one is pretty clear. “ where an injury results in play being stopped OR the restart of play being delayed, the injured player must leave the field of play.” I mean, sure, it is in a messy sentence, but that “or” seems awfully clear to me that if play is stopped, the player goes off.
clear now to me but not the countless within my own county only doing it for those receiving treament
Archer
🟨 C1 (BE)
Quite frankly, and I’ve outgrown being helpful, balls to em. You’ll finish above ‘em on the merit table by being correct in law.
I couldn’t give a toss what LWR did. I’d rather be correct, actually. It’s LWR’s choice to be worse than me at the same job and I’ve no desire to end up on a FA training clip
I have flagged it up with The FA, as match officials and Observers need just one hymn sheet.
one
RefChat Addict
May well be. My reference was in the regards to the generic statement by James.
How long was the delay to the restart?
20-30 seconds and longer than the Scottish clip shown within these threads.
In that case, gets another 60 seconds to recover (IMHO)
i hope something is communicated, it was just awkward as a L6 working with much higher referees - i had a academy game with a L3 and having to try tell him he was wrong in law pre-game was a tad awkward.
I suspect it will get worse come the start of the season for me at least next weekend where some referees will not be applying it consistently, as someone who has always been quite clued up on law changes and making sure i'm "doing things correctly" it will save us all a LOT of trouble if the guidance is updated.
I would eventually like and it will probably happen that the goalkeeper trial will filter down to grassroots. Curiously, has anyone noticed teams taking longer at corners (now they know there's no time limit to take it) versus throws and goal kicks? Not taking long enough to warrant delaying the restart though..
I suspect it will get worse come the start of the season for me at least next weekend where some referees will not be applying it consistently, as someone who has always been quite clued up on law changes and making sure i'm "doing things correctly" it will save us all a LOT of trouble if the guidance is updated.
I would eventually like and it will probably happen that the goalkeeper trial will filter down to grassroots. Curiously, has anyone noticed teams taking longer at corners (now they know there's no time limit to take it) versus throws and goal kicks? Not taking long enough to warrant delaying the restart though..
Archer
🟨 C1 (BE)
Had started to wonder, but also it's been fuuuuuuucking sweltering so wasn't too bothered.
Russell Jones
RefChat Addict
It’s like ‘whack a mole’ … when we stop time wasting in some situations, the issue will inevitably pop in in the other relevant scenariosHad started to wonder, but also it's been fuuuuuuucking sweltering so wasn't too bothered.
To be honest, I wouldn't be opposed to the 5 second rule just becoming a generalised way to speed up all restarts. Any time a referee thinks a restart is taking too long... 5 second countdown... restart reversed if they don't beat it.
Make it a little tricky in the case of a defensive free kick of course... but realistically the object is that teams will learn not to fall foul of the 5 second count as opposed to being punished for failing to beat the count
Make it a little tricky in the case of a defensive free kick of course... but realistically the object is that teams will learn not to fall foul of the 5 second count as opposed to being punished for failing to beat the count
I was asked a question today and actually wasnt sure - my scenario for this question was about stopping play. If I blow for a foul and the player DOESNT want treatment following said foul - does he still go off for a minute? I've read the assessment protocol and it only references
- a player is injured as the result of a physical offence for which the opponent is cautioned or sent off (e.g. reckless or serious foul challenge)
so not careless fouls.
No, because you haven't stopped play for the injury and he hasn't required treatment.
This is why if someone has genuinely taken a knock and you need to stop play, it's easier to give a foul as if they ultimately don't want treatment they can stay on.
But if they do require treatment then yes they go off, that's correct isnt it all the case scenarios I had during pre-season were stoppages. The step4/7 game i did on friday the player went off when the physio came on for assessment. out of curiousity is there specific wording you use to the medical staff about treatment, i know they can assess but ideally you dont want to stop for too long. basically a nice way of saying hurry up is what im after should it happen.
If I'm understanding correctly and you're looking for something to say while they're on the pitch to get them off quickly, I'd maybe go with 'they're going to have to stay off for a minute now anyway I'm afraid so if you're able to do this on the sidelines that would be ideal' or similar, but honestly for 90% of the time I wouldn't bother. If it's not the late stages of a tight game, give them whatever time they need, the other team won't care because ultimately at the end of it they'll be playing a minute against 10 men.
Would like to see how much impact this has to performance come the end of the season. Goals scored while team are a man down due to having to leave after treatment vs goals conceded etc. but it would be hard to compile.