The Ref Stop

Advantage question

So...you've played the advantage but instead of shooting the attacker who has just got the ball stops and looks at you expecting the penalty?
 
The Ref Stop
I love this question @Padfoot. While it would be nice for the player to have the sense and speed of mind to see the glorious advantage you as a ref hope he takes so you can brag on refchat about it later, if he is not gaining any advantage and just standing there, give the penalty and take a moment to tell him what a beautiful chance he just ignored. Easy when there is no disciplinary sanction hanging on it.

Now, throw in a potential penalty/DOGSO in this scenario.... :) Does that change the outcome for anyone?
 
SM said:
I love this question @Padfoot.

Now, throw in a potential penalty/DOGSO in this scenario.... :) Does that change the outcome for anyone?
Click to expand...

Depends on the scenario. Remember the Arsenal Champions league final when Jens Lehmann was sent off? That referee's greatest regret that game was being so quick with the whistle. A second later Barcelona hit the net but as he whistled it was a red and it changed the whole complexion of the game.
 
SM said:
I love this question @Padfoot. While it would be nice for the player to have the sense and speed of mind to see the glorious advantage you as a ref hope he takes so you can brag on refchat about it later, if he is not gaining any advantage and just standing there, give the penalty and take a moment to tell him what a beautiful chance he just ignored. Easy when there is no disciplinary sanction hanging on it.

Now, throw in a potential penalty/DOGSO in this scenario.... :) Does that change the outcome for anyone?
Click to expand...

He has the advantage but has chosen not to use it......
 
So with that in mind - the anticipated advantage has not occurred with no benefit to the team offended against, meaning the referee should penalise the original offence (within the allowed time scale) as laid out in law 5.
 
SM said:
So with that in mind - the anticipated advantage has not occurred with no benefit to the team offended against, meaning the referee should penalise the original offence (within the allowed time scale) as laid out in law 5.
Click to expand...

No. He had the advantage....he chose not to use it.....entirely different.

If you allow that then you start down the slippery path of allowing players to dictate how and when you play advantage.

If you play advantage and they deliberately chose not to use....tough....play on.
 
This is a tough question to answer generally. You really need to be there and assess the specific situation taking into account the nature of the foul, players position etc. For a referee it can be a no win situation as someone will feel you should have made the opposite decision. I had this type of incident in a game last year. Striker was fouled around the penalty spot but managed to stay on his feet albeit a little off balance. The defending players were well out of position so I signalled advantage, striker regained his balance and sliced it wide from 10 yards, goal kick awarded. I think he realised it was his mistake and was too embarassed to complain. Luckily the game was over by this point and we were able to discuss it sensibly after the match.
 
Padfoot said:
No. He had the advantage....he chose not to use it.....entirely different.

If you allow that then you start down the slippery path of allowing players to dictate how and when you play advantage.

If you play advantage and they deliberately chose not to use....tough....play on.
Click to expand...
I tend to agree with you in those cases where players take the law into their own hands and choose not to use the advantage. Though interestingly in some other sports (most notably rugby) it's deemed perfectly acceptable for teams to do just that and opt to take the penalty instead.

The only thing I worry about is that other situations would be far less clear cut .. did he deliberately waste the advantage or is he just not very good! .. and you're then in the position of having the guess the intent of his action / inaction
 
Why should a player have to accept a situation they don't want because the referee thinks it's a good opportunity to not have to make a difficult decision?
 
but if the player doesn't take the "advantage" the referee sees, there is no advantage.

You may want the player to take it and save you from an unpopular/difficult course of action but there is nothing in the Lotg that says the player has to take it.

There will be varying shades of grey to this around sportsmanship. A spurned tap in to an empty net is taking the mickey from the player. However, a foul which leaves a 1-1 with a great performing keeper from the edge of the area? I can see some players might not like the odds when there HAS BEEN A DOGSO foul (let's not lose sight of the fact the attackinf team have suffered a foul). Especially as they know they get nothing if the chance is missed.

I accept you could say there is still an OGSO after the foul though.
 
Last edited:
SM said:
but if the player doesn't take the "advantage" the referee sees, there is no advantage.

You may want the player to take it and save you from an unpopular/difficult course of action but there is nothing in the Lotg that says the player has to take it.

There will be varying shades of grey to this around sportsmanship. A spurned tap in to an empty net is taking the mickey from the player. However, a foul which leaves a 1-1 with a great performing keeper from the edge of the area? I can see some players might not like the odds when there HAS BEEN A DOGSO foul (let's not lose sight of the fact the attackinf team have suffered a foul). Especially as they know they get nothing if the chance is missed.

I accept you could say there is still an OGSO after the foul though.
Click to expand...

So...you're stood there arms outstretched shouting "advantage" and the player just looks at you and "nah, ill have the fk/penalty thanks mate"......
And you're going to drop your arms, blow up and go "ok mate, we`ll do it your way"......
Really?
 
Padfoot said:
So...you're stood there arms outstretched shouting "advantage" and the player just looks at you and "nah, ill have the fk/penalty thanks mate"......
And you're going to drop your arms, blow up and go "ok mate, we`ll do it your way"......
Really?
Click to expand...
I wouldn't be dumb enough to immediately shout advantage. :)
 
Having started this thread, I think I would blow immediately for the penalty, as the arguments have developed, as far as match control is concerned, I can see less and less reason for playing advantage.
 
My understanding, and I always apply this, is that there is never an advantage played where a PK could be awarded. The PK is itself the advantage, whether the player goes on to score or not.

Had this exact scenario in my first game of this season, before could blow for the PK another player took a shot at goal from 10 yards and hoofed it over the bar. Awarded the pen and had all sorts of complaints from the defending team, to which I replied "had he scored, I would have pulled it back for the PK, he was just to quick for me".
 
Monotone Whistle said:
My understanding, and I always apply this, is that there is never an advantage played where a PK could be awarded. The PK is itself the advantage, whether the player goes on to score or not.

Had this exact scenario in my first game of this season, before could blow for the PK another player took a shot at goal from 10 yards and hoofed it over the bar. Awarded the pen and had all sorts of complaints from the defending team, to which I replied "had he scored, I would have pulled it back for the PK, he was just to quick for me".
Click to expand...

You would have chalked out a perfectly good goal in favour of a 50/50 chance of one?

And when they missed the penalty, your credibility is shot, along with most of your match control.....and your club marks!
 
OIREF! said:
This is a tough question to answer generally. You really need to be there and assess the specific situation taking into account the nature of the foul, players position etc. For a referee it can be a no win situation as someone will feel you should have made the opposite decision. I had this type of incident in a game last year. Striker was fouled around the penalty spot but managed to stay on his feet albeit a little off balance. The defending players were well out of position so I signalled advantage, striker regained his balance and sliced it wide from 10 yards, goal kick awarded. I think he realised it was his mistake and was too embarassed to complain. Luckily the game was over by this point and we were able to discuss it sensibly after the match.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you made the right decision. If, however, he tried to take the shot while he was still a bit off balance, then you'd go back to the penalty.

Monotone Whistle said:
My understanding, and I always apply this, is that there is never an advantage played where a PK could be awarded. The PK is itself the advantage, whether the player goes on to score or not.

Had this exact scenario in my first game of this season, before could blow for the PK another player took a shot at goal from 10 yards and hoofed it over the bar. Awarded the pen and had all sorts of complaints from the defending team, to which I replied "had he scored, I would have pulled it back for the PK, he was just to quick for me".
Click to expand...

I'm with the defending team on that one. He took a non-disadvantaged shot before you blew the whistle. He took the advantage.

Can't possibly understand the logic behind disallowing a goal because you haven't blown the whistle yet. that's not how it works.
SM said:
but if the player doesn't take the "advantage" the referee sees, there is no advantage.

You may want the player to take it and save you from an unpopular/difficult course of action but there is nothing in the Lotg that says the player has to take it.

There will be varying shades of grey to this around sportsmanship. A spurned tap in to an empty net is taking the mickey from the player. However, a foul which leaves a 1-1 with a great performing keeper from the edge of the area? I can see some players might not like the odds when there HAS BEEN A DOGSO foul (let's not lose sight of the fact the attackinf team have suffered a foul). Especially as they know they get nothing if the chance is missed.

I accept you could say there is still an OGSO after the foul though.
Click to expand...

Advantage is possesison + opportunity. He has both. If you call advantage and the player stops still, he's not going to get the free kick.
 
Even if you haven't shouted advantage that doesn't mean you can't still let the shot go.

If it was a fair shot that was in no way disadvantaged by the initial foul, then how is it fair to award the penalty because he missed the shot? That's not what the advantage clause is for. Arguing about whether or not advantage is being called is a debate on whether you technically can go back. Of course you could make either decision within the laws. The debate is whether you should, not whether you can.
 
I'm with @SM on this.

If you give the penalty no one will be talking about the shot after the game, either team IMO.

If you don't give the penalty you will be talked about and remembered for the next few times you referee them and will have to work harder to earn back their respect.

For me you will have to put more effort into explaining why you didn't give the penalty for the 'advantage' than giving a penalty after it. I want an easy life. I'm not there to spoil any one's day, just do the job and go home.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top