A&H

Advantage: 'Play on!'

Jtpetherick1

Well-Known Member
Hi all, in a recent assessment I was picked up on for my application of the advantage clause. I've always been praised on this in the past and, to be fair, this assessor noted that I saw opportunities and applied it well.
However, my use of language was recently picked up on - I've always been more comfortable, don't ask me why (!), shouting 'keep going' or 'play on' rather than 'advantage' - is one of these right/wrong in law? Or was it just a rather picky assessor?
 
The Referee Store
Hi all, in a recent assessment I was picked up on for my application of the advantage clause. I've always been praised on this in the past and, to be fair, this assessor noted that I saw opportunities and applied it well.
However, my use of language was recently picked up on - I've always been more comfortable, don't ask me why (!), shouting 'keep going' or 'play on' rather than 'advantage' - is one of these right/wrong in law? Or was it just a rather picky assessor?
I do similar. In my recent assessment, i played two advantages which led directly to goals. This wasn't mentioned, but my incorrect language got a mention :|
 
Shouting and signalling advantage is needed. Anything else means you should not pull play back if it doesn't accrue, and players are aware you have seen an offence. Other terms such as Play on, is interpreted as no offence committed.

Sorry, but the actual term is required.
 
‘Keep going’ or ‘play on’ could suggest you felt there was no foul, while ‘advantage’ clearly shows you’ve seen a foul but are not stopping play.

Exactly that, and then you risk a retaliation as the fouled player thinks you have just missed it rather than are playing advantage.
 
I use 'advantage' if playing advantage. 'Nothing there' or 'fair challenge's if players expect a foul after losing the ball but there was no foul. And keep going or keep playing when they retain the ball, there is a expectation of a foul but there is no foul, after a foul but letting the game flow (there is no attacking opportunity for an actual advantage) or a 50-50. I use keep going for other times also like when they think I should stop play but I don't think I should, like a close ball in/out, they see my AR flag but I wave it down, possible interference etc.

Play on is in the middle of it all. Some referees use it for advantage and some use it for saying there was no foul. That's why I don't use it at all to avoid confusion. As an assessor I don't mind referees saying "play on advantage" but I'd advise them against using it on its own, foul or no fouls.

While I am here, another thing I'd advise against is 'ball' or 'he got the ball' to justify no foul.
 
I believe there is some historical use of "play on" as a synonym for "advantage," which often led to advice to not use "play on" (or anything too similar) for anything except advantage. It is important for players to know that advantage was played as opposed to you missing the call (which might well be the inference from "keep going.") I've evolved into "Advantage! Play on!" being my typical verbalization.

For non-handling, I much prefer "not deliberate" as it not only says I saw it, but says why I'm not calling it. (Aside: I do youth games--and I'll verbalize that less at 19U than younger ages.) And speaking of younger ages, be careful about loud the "no"--the loud referee "no" that works with adults or older kids can cause younger kids to stop.
 
There is a clip on youtube of an A league game were the referee is micd up, its the ref think his name is Jarrett who was "signed" to referee in the Championship.

There is a foul which he sees clearly, holds his arms out in front of him to signal advantage but is clearly shouting "play on, play on"


30 seconds in.
 
There is a clip on youtube of an A league game were the referee is micd up, its the ref think his name is Jarrett who was "signed" to referee in the Championship.

There is a foul which he sees clearly, holds his arms out in front of him to signal advantage but is clearly shouting "play on, play on"


30 seconds in.
I was marked down in my L7 to 6 assessment for doing exactly this. Sorta disheartening really
 
I was marked down in my L7 to 6 assessment for doing exactly this. Sorta disheartening really

What? You think there is consistency out there?

Speaking of which, I just heard that--at the top levels--in the US the powers that be are teaching that the R should never be in the PA while the ball is in play. Can I prove that? No. Far too much here is the trickle down theory, with presentations only given at the very top level camps. Apparently those of us among the hoi polloi are supposed to guess at what is being taught. So I have no idea if the powers that be here think that you should always use advantage rather than play on as the vocalization.
 
Apparently those of us among the hoi polloi are supposed to guess at what is being taught
I've stated this many times before. The guidelines and presentations should be universally identical and available to anyone whose willing to learn. Promotion will be a function of ability to apply what is disseminated to all. The shrouded teachings afforded to the privileged few lead to inconsistency on a regional basis and a masonic feel to it all. If it wasn't for the forum, I'd be a crappy ref (all of the time, that is!)
 
I was marked down in my L7 to 6 assessment for doing exactly this. Sorta disheartening really

Laws of the game are universal. Promotion scheme performance criteria aren't even the same between levels in England let alone the same globally.

Lots of examples. At lower levels you are expected to signal advantage immediately and pull it back if necessary, once you get to L3 that is discouraged and they expect you to hold off from any kind of signal until it is clear the advantage is going to come off. A lot of observers at L4 and below still expect "wide and deep", do that at L3 and you are going to get picked to pieces.

Not ideal I know, but different associations are going to want to see different behaviours from their referees. Just looking at how England have implemented VAR would clearly demonstrate that ... :)
 
The reason that it is better to use the actual word advantage is because it lets everyone know you've seen the foul, but there is a reason to keep playing. Just shouting "keep going" or "play on" could indicate to the players that you do not believe a foul has occured or that you see their protest and don't agree.


Besides this, an assessor cannot simply say "you had a perfect game." He needs to find something and this is an easy one to pick you up on. If this is the only fault he can find, then that looks mighty good on you.
 
The guidelines and presentations should be universally identical and available to anyone whose willing to learn. Promotion will be a function of ability to apply what is disseminated to all.

I'm at that sort of stage now; I did my 4-3 last season, good feedback, commendations etc. I think I mentioned in another topic how one of my strong areas was identification of cautions/dismissals and application thereof.

Now I'm getting the level 3 lower tier matches along with one or two of them having more senior referees on the line to assist/advise me, and I'm starting to hear more about 'game management' over a straightforward caution, or outright ignoring some of the more technical offences/issues.

At a training session recently we were reminded to tailor our tolerance to the level we are at. Sometimes, a red card at grassroots might just be a caution at the more higher levels and vice versa. I think it's interesting to go through this, but being at the middle stage I do admit I'm finding it a bit difficult as I'm starting to over-think whether my style is fine or whether I need to loosen the reins more for 'management' etc.

I guess at the end of the day, being adaptable is going to be the key thing to a good career?
 
Back
Top