A&H

Open Age Caution for handball

Caution or not?

  • Total voters
    18
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

ref11

New Member
Opinions on following scenario please:

There is a tight ball out of play call close to the assistant referee. The ball isn't out of play. An outfield player catches the ball in the middle of the park thinking it was out of play. The whistle had not been blown. The player was shown a yellow card which was his second of the game and was dismissed. Correct call or not?
 
The Referee Store
Play to the whistle!!

Obviously not if assistant had flagged and ref was overruling.
 
Last edited:
Darius said:
It's a mandatory caution.

There's not even a debate to it
Click to expand...
Really? Has he deliberately handled the ball to deny an opponent possession? It's the middle of the pitch, silly thing to do, but not exactly game changing.

Common sense. Just give the freekick and have a word.
 
The player has certainly handled the ball and done so deliberately albeit mistakenly. You'd only caution if the player was attempting to score a goal or is preventing the opposition from gaining possession. The former is unlikely given the context of the post but the latter is entirely possible. If the referee felt the player had stopped the opposition from gaining possession, the caution for USB is correct and if it's a second yellow so be it.
 
I am guessing this is a hypothetical scenario?

Some necessary elements of the story missing; The first is level of the game; are there neutral assistants? Was a CAR flagging? Would you really send someone off for a second caution for this at grassroots? ;)

Secondly - the player catching the ball. Did it just land in his arms, would he have had possession otherwise if he hadn't picked it up? Was there a promising attack if he had not grabbed the ball?

From what was described, applying law 18 sounds the way to go.
 
@Darius Imagine you're cruising through a nice game which is in your pocket. Both players responding well, match control everything going really well.

This happens, players are all expecting a FK, you pull out a yellow and send him off, you're going to have the other 10 left on the pitch pi55ed with you, and the other 11 thinking you're a jobsworth, losing your match control and making an easy game a tough game, which will reflect from club marks and a low marking assessment.

Going for a caution here, when the player has made a genuine error of judgement, give the FK, keep the game and smile with the player.
 
Jacko said:
which will reflect from club marks and a low marking assessment
Click to expand...
Would that really be the case? I understand the low club marks is a possibility, nay probability but, isn't it dependent on the assessor as to to whether you'd get low assessment marks?
There's a lack of context about the OP but the assessor may take a view that there was an attempt to deny possession and a caution was merited. If you fudge it, you'll be marked down irrespective of your ability to maintain match control afterwards. Your ability to handle a tough game should earn more merit than handling an easy one.
Whichever path you take, it has to correct in law if being assessed or not. At least that's my opinion.
 
I selected caution as it is 'technically' the right way to go ... you are all questioning if he denied the other team possession, or took possession for the other team but I can confirm for all of you that might be confused - if the player has the ball in his hands, I'm going to struggle to get it off him - meaning his taken possession away from me!

now - lets flip it on its head - lets take this to grassroots football where we have a hard enough job as it is! I would most definitely be giving the free kick, maybe a little chat with the offender - reminding him he is on a yellow already and a silly mistake like that could cost him and the team the game!

brownie points won, both teams happy (1 is still fielding 11, the other has a free kick) you walk away at 90mins with a cape around your neck and handshakes all around! (and the crowd goes wild!! wheeyyyyyy!!)
 
@David Sutton I accept if he tried to denied possession then it's left a referee with little option, but from the image that I've portrayed in my head for a ball going out of play that is close, that the player thought was out of play I can't see a caution.
 
Deliberately handles the ball is the foul. And I'm not just arguing semantics here - in cases like this, it's actually important that referees understand this - because not enough do.

The problem is, there's 'deliberate' in the meaning of his law, which doesn't really match up with the 'street' meaning of 'deliberate'. When a player sees an opponent make a clearly intentional handling of the ball, they think it's a caution for 'deliberate handling'. I'm talking slapping the ball away, or catching it in these scenarios, or jumping up to stop the ball going too far away from the field not realising they're still on the field. Players will scream these are cautions but really, the fact that it's a clearly intentional act is barely relevant.

It's only cautionable if it's done to deny an opponent possession, or done to score a goal. That's it. No other scenario. So, unless this case was, breaking up an attack (and you'd probably take any potential confusion into consideration here as well) there's no reason to caution here.

Darius said:
It's a mandatory caution.

There's not even a debate to it
Click to expand...

Really? What gives you that idea? Read the Additional Advice carefully then get back to us :)

Personally, I'd love to hear from the other 3 people who voted 'caution' here. Because, unless there's missing critical information here, it's definitely not a caution.
SM said:
From what was described, applying law 18 sounds the way to go.
Click to expand...
I'm going to be really pedantic here - IMO Law 18 doesn't even come into it here. Law 12 answers this one quite clearly.

Law 18 may come into it if there's contention over whether it's denying an opponent possession or not, but assuming that wasn't the case (and we can only assume such from the information provided), Law 12 and the Additional Advice answer this one.
 
Charlie Jones said:
I selected caution as it is 'technically' the right way to go ... you are all questioning if he denied the other team possession, or took possession for the other team but I can confirm for all of you that might be confused - if the player has the ball in his hands, I'm going to struggle to get it off him - meaning his taken possession away from me!
Click to expand...

Yes we are all using the laws to decide whether it's a caution. You have randomly decided it's "technically" the way to go.
I'm afraid we're not the confused party.
By your logic EVERY foul is a caution
 
Charlie Jones said:
I selected caution as it is 'technically' the right way to go ... you are all questioning if he denied the other team possession, or took possession for the other team but I can confirm for all of you that might be confused - if the player has the ball in his hands, I'm going to struggle to get it off him - meaning his taken possession away from me!
Click to expand...
1) why is a caution technically correct?
2) As for the rest of your post....what????
 
I always laughed after players wanted a caution for a handball under the line "it's deliberate".
With some of the answers from qualified referees I now know why they think that.
Beard is right, law 18 isn't even required. The answer is already in the 17 laws provided.
 
deusex said:
I always laughed after players wanted a caution for a handball under the line "it's deliberate".
With some of the answers from qualified referees I now know why they think that.
Beard is right, law 18 isn't even required. The answer is already in the 17 laws provided.
Click to expand...

Like when you see referee's stop play and give an indirect free kick when a player says leave it when talking to a team mate with no opponents near him.

Then when we get "You can't say that ref" you know where it comes from.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top