Advantage & Protests
- Thread starter JBeil
- Start date
Ciley Myrus
RefChat Addict
There was a long running thread just last week re this.
From the description you give, I would be leaning more towards simply giving the fk, safe refereeing.
Is it really an advantage to them? Advantage is to restore the balance after they have been fouled.
Not saying their reaction here is my tipping point. But, am open to giving them the fk here.
Asking for trouble attempting advantage when its not beneficial to the wrongee team and having it fail to materialise.
Yes, generally I would say play on.
I've had a worse scenario happen before: Foul tackle, ball goes clean through the defence to a player who is presented with a good chance at a good angle. I shout advantage, player picks up the ball expecting the free-kick. Blew the whistle, foul, handball.
No complaints, but I think in this situation both teams recognised it was a great advantage and he'd ****ed it up.
But I think context matters a lot here; Have you been consistent in applying advantage in this match? Was it a genuine advantage? Where on the field did it take place? Was the mood of the game right for the advantage to be applied? - For the last question, going by the reaction of the players, it may have not been.
Also if apply the principle of "wait and see" you will see the 'advantage' fail to materialise because of the player appeals and can simply whistle to bring back play, you can always explain away the late whistle. Always wait and see because sometimes you get 10 players appealing and one savvy lad taking the ball and doing a Ryan Giggs through the middle - when you spot that, then shout the advantage and you probably won't do much wrong.
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
I think, like so many things, it depends.
First, ask yourself if there really was advantage (i.e., was the situation they had more beneficial than the free kick would be). Often if players react that way, they don't think there was.
The more clear obvious the advantage, the more likely I would be to stick with it--especially if I have signaled it. If it is less clear, and I'm having a patient whistle to see if there is advantage, I'm going to call the foul at that point.
We can go back if the advantage doesn't materialize. But squandering the advantage is not the same thing as not materializing. If the undefended player with the ball at his feet and a path to the goal wants to scream for a foul instead of playing, and that results in him getting covered, I'm not going back for the foul.
One more thing to consider is the level of the game--is it a game where the players are really able and expecting to be taking advantage of advantage situations? In a younger or lower skilled game, I would be more likely to go back to the foul if they stop than I would in a higher level, more skilled game. (Though the reality is that in a more skilled game, the players are less likely to stop if the advantage is actually there.)
First, ask yourself if there really was advantage (i.e., was the situation they had more beneficial than the free kick would be). Often if players react that way, they don't think there was.
The more clear obvious the advantage, the more likely I would be to stick with it--especially if I have signaled it. If it is less clear, and I'm having a patient whistle to see if there is advantage, I'm going to call the foul at that point.
We can go back if the advantage doesn't materialize. But squandering the advantage is not the same thing as not materializing. If the undefended player with the ball at his feet and a path to the goal wants to scream for a foul instead of playing, and that results in him getting covered, I'm not going back for the foul.
One more thing to consider is the level of the game--is it a game where the players are really able and expecting to be taking advantage of advantage situations? In a younger or lower skilled game, I would be more likely to go back to the foul if they stop than I would in a higher level, more skilled game. (Though the reality is that in a more skilled game, the players are less likely to stop if the advantage is actually there.)
one
RefChat Addict
If a player is fouled and wants a free kick (or the team mate who gets the ball but wants a free kick), you'd know straight away (body language, stops playing...) and you wont play advantage. If a player is fouled and continues playing then lose the ball and throw their arm up wanting a free kick, they want two bytes at the cherry which they are not entitled to.
Actually, a free kick is to restore the balance. Advantage is when you detect restoring of balance is not needed.
CapnBloodbeard
RefChat Addict
This is the lot of the referee. You're damned either way here.
If you blow the whistle, then the defending team will complain that you only blew it because they stopped (and...well....they'd be right).
Don't blow, they keep complaining. Do blow, and players are clearly telling you how to referee.
Ahh screw it, abandon
Personally, I've always been in the 'if you're going to stand around flapping your arms, it's your problem' camp. Another shout of 'PLAY ON ADVANTAGE' usually gets it going without too much dissent....though bear in mind you might see a frustrated reckless tackle if the other team gets the ball.
Related, one of my pet hates is when a player running feels an opponent put a hand on him or grab a fistful of shirt....and stops running putting his hands up. Too many referees give a FK in response to that.
I'm not giving a FK unless I can see the player is actually affected.
Aside from coping with CARs and Match Control in general, 'Advantage' is probably the most challenging Law for inexperienced referees
In general, playing advantage has more potential for causing the ref problems than awarding the FK. That's because the severity of the foul clouds our judgement and it's difficult to communicate advantage promptly and effectively. Moreover, it's tricky to assess when advantage has ended, to know when to bring play back and to be aware of when a quick whistle is needed. Mess up on any of these judgements and a headache is in store. I've had the full range of migraines but am now focused on preventing frequent clusters! Contrasting stories but in my last game, I played three advantages which immediately led to goals, whereas Six months ago, I whistled a second before the ball hit the back of the net. The joys of advantage
In general, playing advantage has more potential for causing the ref problems than awarding the FK. That's because the severity of the foul clouds our judgement and it's difficult to communicate advantage promptly and effectively. Moreover, it's tricky to assess when advantage has ended, to know when to bring play back and to be aware of when a quick whistle is needed. Mess up on any of these judgements and a headache is in store. I've had the full range of migraines but am now focused on preventing frequent clusters! Contrasting stories but in my last game, I played three advantages which immediately led to goals, whereas Six months ago, I whistled a second before the ball hit the back of the net. The joys of advantage
A key point missing here is how long was there between the foul and the arm throwing and ruined advantage.This is the lot of the referee. You're damned either way here.
If you blow the whistle, then the defending team will complain that you only blew it because they stopped (and...well....they'd be right).
Don't blow, they keep complaining. Do blow, and players are clearly telling you how to referee.
Ahh screw it, abandon
Personally, I've always been in the 'if you're going to stand around flapping your arms, it's your problem' camp. Another shout of 'PLAY ON ADVANTAGE' usually gets it going without too much dissent....though bear in mind you might see a frustrated reckless tackle if the other team gets the ball.
Related, one of my pet hates is when a player running feels an opponent put a hand on him or grab a fistful of shirt....and stops running putting his hands up. Too many referees give a FK in response to that.
I'm not giving a FK unless I can see the player is actually affected.
Based on this example, it seems to me like they expected the free kick and threw their arms up frustrated wanting the foul and thus, there was never actually an advantage in the first place.
Ciley Myrus
RefChat Addict
The above was my point, its all very well us as refs laying down the law and saying we are the man, but, the players have a huge say in whether an advantage is beneficial. Pointless and foolish us standing there with arm(s) in air screaming, advantage, thinking we are doing a team a benefit, when they are all totally just wanting the foul
From the op pic i have in my head, the fk is safe and sensible option
zarathustra
RefChat Addict
If the players stop and wave their arms around, I'd be inclined to play on if I've already played the advantage.
But, you need to consider the location of the foul and how the fouled team has played upto that point.
I had a ladies game last Sunday, away team were very strong footballing side, and there was a careless trip maybe 10 yards out side the penalty area, player stayed on her feet and kept possession, I played advantage and they went on to put a cross in and take a shot which was saved and ended up as a corner.
I know that the home team wouldn't have benefitted from an advantage in that position, but a free kick would have suited them down to the ground.
But, you need to consider the location of the foul and how the fouled team has played upto that point.
I had a ladies game last Sunday, away team were very strong footballing side, and there was a careless trip maybe 10 yards out side the penalty area, player stayed on her feet and kept possession, I played advantage and they went on to put a cross in and take a shot which was saved and ended up as a corner.
I know that the home team wouldn't have benefitted from an advantage in that position, but a free kick would have suited them down to the ground.
There's no advantage in your defending third - FK just about every time, unless they're breaking and no attackes around them.
There's probably more advantage from a set piece in the central third to get it into the box, so FK most of the time.
Attacking third let them get on with it and bring it back if nothing comes.
There's probably more advantage from a set piece in the central third to get it into the box, so FK most of the time.
Attacking third let them get on with it and bring it back if nothing comes.