Still don't agree.
At the end of the day, an offence has been committed. Why should the offending team get away with it because of a (potentially) naff advantage call by the ref? Like I said, if it's a good advantage and a promising attack or even a goal develops from it then you've allowed the offence to go unpunished in the interests of attacking football (not withstanding that you might still go back and caution the offender if the challenge was reckless) but nobody minds. The advantage you play, is an award to the attacking team as such, it's not penalising the offending team in anyway, and as such it's not then "unfair" to come back for the original FK. Not for me anyway. I understand what you're saying, but I think it's wrong.
Think the reason that you and @Kes are disagreeing is that you're envisaging (slightly) different scenarios. The one you describe above is IMO a clear advantage, as you say. The attacker has a number of great options but wastes the advantage by choosing the wrong one. If instead, the only credible positive choice is to pass to the player in the offside position then, in reality, the advantage was never really there and the referee should just bring it back for the original free kick. In the OP, it's impossible to tell which of the two scenarios we had ... hence the debate!
Think the reason that you and @Kes are disagreeing is that you're envisaging (slightly) different scenarios. The one you describe above is IMO a clear advantage, as you say. The attacker has a number of great options but wastes the advantage by choosing the wrong one. If instead, the only credible positive choice is to pass to the player in the offside position then, in reality, the advantage was never really there and the referee should just bring it back for the original free kick. In the OP, it's impossible to tell which of the two scenarios we had ... hence the debate!
In the second scenario you would award the foul not because "the anticipated advantage does not ensue" but because there never was an advantage and you were mistaken by thinking there was. I am correcting my own mistake (which i am entitled to do in this case) not the player's mistake. And as @Martiju says, if the team mate became offside because the player took two extra touches, then no going back, because it was the player's mistake not mine.Think the reason that you and @Kes are disagreeing is that you're envisaging (slightly) different scenarios. The one you describe above is IMO a clear advantage, as you say. The attacker has a number of great options but wastes the advantage by choosing the wrong one. If instead, the only credible positive choice is to pass to the player in the offside position then, in reality, the advantage was never really there and the referee should just bring it back for the original free kick. In the OP, it's impossible to tell which of the two scenarios we had ... hence the debate!
