The Ref Stop

Best performance yet!

Wolf_Ref

Wolf_Ref

RefChat Addict
Level 3W Referee
Have to say - had a double header today and think it’s the best performance I’ve done yet this season.

Kept up with play but also had good dialogue with players and managed behaviour well.

Had a few bookings (one resulted in a red for 2 cautions - first one of the season for me!) and one sin bin in the first game (player had had a few moans and had his warning - he was unhappy that he didn’t get a FK, so kicked the corner flag after moaning at me.... )

The second game was absolutely fine.

Hopefully can carry this forward. Feeling really positive about it.
 
The Ref Stop
Today’s was also good. Had one off for OFFINABUS, but other than that, was a good game.

Had the most obvious deliberate handball I’ve ever seen - YC but also hilarious. Whole pitch and spectators laughing.

I did struggle a bit with the legs due to the hard ground - Achilles/calves were quite sore at the end - considering getting some Astro-style boots for really dry/hard ground.
 
SurreyWolves said:
Today’s was also good. Had one off for OFFINABUS, but other than that, was a good game.

Had the most obvious deliberate handball I’ve ever seen - YC but also hilarious. Whole pitch and spectators laughing.

I did struggle a bit with the legs due to the hard ground - Achilles/calves were quite sore at the end - considering getting some Astro-style boots for really dry/hard ground.
Click to expand...
Why was it a caution? Deliberate handball isn't a cautionable offence.
Only if it stops or interferes with a PA or attempts to stop a goal or is unsporting behaviour.
 
JamesL said:
Why was it a caution? Deliberate handball isn't a cautionable offence.
Only if it stops or interferes with a PA or attempts to stop a goal or is unsporting behaviour.
Click to expand...
It came under USB - as it was stopping a promising attack (ball in air and handled to gain an unfair advantage, thus ending any chance of the attack continuing) - it could also come under the "showing a lack of respect for the game" side, if contested.
 
Forgot to add - gave advantage for a foul which lead directly to a shot and goal. Anyone else get a good feeling when that happens?
 
SurreyWolves said:
It came under USB - as it was stopping a promising attack (ball in air and handled to gain an unfair advantage, thus ending any chance of the attack continuing) - it could also come under the "showing a lack of respect for the game" side, if contested.
Click to expand...

If it stopped a 'promissing' attack, so be it. But cautioning because it was deliberate or blatant and then putting it under lack of respect is a cop out. No need to make the second statement as it would make it sounds like you are trying to justify a YC for something IFAB specifically doesn't want to be a YC.
 
one said:
If it stopped a 'promissing' attack, so be it. But cautioning because it was deliberate or blatant and then putting it under lack of respect is a cop out. No need to make the second statement as it would make it sounds like you are trying to justify a YC for something IFAB specifically doesn't want to be a YC.
Click to expand...

Mandatory caution for spelling there @one. ;)

Shocking ... :p
 
Agree with the fact that it didn’t need or warrant me to use the “respect to game” reasoning. However, if I were to play Devil’s advocate; if someone did HB in a way that was unsporting but not denying a PA, then surely that comes under the umbrella USB bracket of not showing “respect to the game”? (Aware I could be opening a can of worms)
@one
 
SurreyWolves said:
Agree with the fact that it didn’t need or warrant me to use the “respect to game” reasoning. However, if I were to play Devil’s advocate; if someone did HB in a way that was unsporting but not denying a PA, then surely that comes under the umbrella USB bracket of not showing “respect to the game”? (Aware I could be opening a can of worms)
@one
Click to expand...
You'd be stretching it imo.
The laws state the two mandatory cautions.
The only other way is unsporting g behaviour in my view.
"An unfair action/behaviour" and that's the bit you have to justify. Just because a player handles it deliberately is not a justifiable reason to caution.
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
But for someone to do it deliberately to control the ball for themselves, in itself should be punishable by a YC as its clearly unsporting IMO.
 
SurreyWolves said:
But for someone to do it deliberately to control the ball for themselves, in itself should be punishable by a YC as its clearly unsporting IMO.
Click to expand...

It's one of those "YHTBT" instances mate. If the handball incident is just careless yet avoidable on the part of the player, then it's just the DFK. If in your view it's cynical, whether or not it stops a PA, then you could argue for a caution as well. :)
 
SurreyWolves said:
Agree with the fact that it didn’t need or warrant me to use the “respect to game” reasoning. However, if I were to play Devil’s advocate; if someone did HB in a way that was unsporting but not denying a PA, then surely that comes under the umbrella USB bracket of not showing “respect to the game”? (Aware I could be opening a can of worms)
@one
Click to expand...
That is the line of thinking that IFAB tried to prevent by changing the laws.

The simple answer is, if your main reason for YC is handball then it's not right. But if it's something else that coincided with handball and that something else is USB in your opinion, then you'd be correct.

An analogy I can use, if a prolonged hold interferes with a promising attack and you play advantage, you can't caution for SPA, but you can still caution for the behaviour of the prolonged hold (you would have cautioned that even without the SPA in play).
 
one said:
That is the line of thinking that IFAB tried to prevent by changing the laws.

The simple answer is, if your main reason for YC is handball then it's not right. But if it's something else that coincided with handball and that something else is USB in your opinion, then you'd be correct.

An analogy I can use, if a prolonged hold interferes with a promising attack and you play advantage, you can't caution for SPA, but you can still caution for the behaviour of the prolonged hold (you would have cautioned that even without the SPA in play).
Click to expand...
Yeah - I think the good thing about the laws is USB covers all grounds and if, in the spirit of the game, something is not right, we have the tools to deal with it, if necessary and/or appropriate.

I did have one thing - if a player is put off at a penalty by another player saying "he will miss this" - what would the restart be if the pen was missed? It was not blatant yesterday and not loud enough to be heard, but had me thinking a bit after regarding "what if".
 
SurreyWolves said:
I did have one thing - if a player is put off at a penalty by another player saying "he will miss this" - what would the restart be if the pen was missed? It was not blatant yesterday and not loud enough to be heard, but had me thinking a bit after regarding "what if".
Click to expand...

if, ITOOTR, it was sufficient to call, it’s USB and a retake of the PK.
 
socal lurker said:
if, ITOOTR, it was sufficient to call, it’s USB and a retake of the PK.
Click to expand...
Can you verbally distract some one in advance?
I don't think that is in the spirit of the laws. Yes caution for it if you think it fits USB but that needs to happen before the penalty is taken in the first place, nor following the result of it...
 
Yeah agree. Playing mind games is not the same as distracting. If he yelled "miss" as the kick was being taken (last couple of steps or just before the kick), that would be distracting.

To add, if we call a comment made in advance distracting then we have to do it both ways. If the kicker or a team mate says he is kicking it to the right, would that be distracting the keeper?
 
one said:
Yeah agree. Playing mind games is not the same as distracting. If he yelled "miss" as the kick was being taken (last couple of steps or just before the kick), that would be distracting.

To add, if we call a comment made in advance distracting then we have to do it both ways. If the kicker or a team mate says he is kicking it to the right, would that be distracting the keeper?
Click to expand...

Getting too far down into the weeds of it there. The above is no different to saying every time a player shouts "our ball Ref!" when appealing for a throw-in, corner, FK, GK etc is distracting the referee.

You can only realistically distract someone on the field by sight or sound - not psychologically ... ;)
 
JamesL said:
Can you verbally distract some one in advance?
I don't think that is in the spirit of the laws. Yes caution for it if you think it fits USB but that needs to happen before the penalty is taken in the first place, nor following the result of it...
Click to expand...

I read (perhaps misread) as being right before/as he kicks it.

If it's earlier than that, I agree--don't blow the whistle for the kick. Talk to or caution the miscreant first, and then take the kick.

I think the reality is that it extremely rare for someone to do something that interferes with a PK enough to pass over the trifling bar. (I don't recall ever seeing it, though I have cautioned for verbal distraction a couple of times while the ball was in play.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top