I've been out with Level 4s who have done that, and the assessor has actually told them they're correct in doing it. What hope do the rest of us have?!
Open Age Caution for handball
- Thread starter ref11
- Start date
- Status
Really? That's awful.
CapnBloodbeard
RefChat Addict
That's what these forums are for.
Assessors are like referees: Some are fantastic, some at least try really hard and some wouldn't know what day of the week it is and don't particularly care to find out. Don't assume somebody knows what they're talking about just because they're holding a clipboard - I could write quite a long list of the utter stupidity I've seen/heard from assessors.
For each piece of advice - whether it's from an assessor, a colleague, online, or even a non referee (seriously, 2 of the best pieces of advice I've received have actually been from team coaches!) - take it on board, consider it, let it simmer, analyse it then draw your own conclusions. somebody tells you something about the law, check it yourself. If it seems to contradict or not sit in the law, or doesn't fit with what you've previously heard, then you need to make a decision - do you throw out the new knowledge or the old? What has the presentor of new knowledge said/done to make you believe that the new knowledge is more valid? If you're finding that conflict in advice, then it's suggesting you need to investigate further, ask more questions, then make your decision.
Make all the right noises to the assessor, but decide later if your best way forward is simply to forget everything he said. But at least consider what was offered and make sure you're making an educated, considered decision in that.
I would think that if no attacker is mentioned then there's no reason at all to assume that he broke up an attack
If we're going to make assumptions or extend a question to another possibility, we need to clearly state those.
Assessors are like referees: Some are fantastic, some at least try really hard and some wouldn't know what day of the week it is and don't particularly care to find out. Don't assume somebody knows what they're talking about just because they're holding a clipboard - I could write quite a long list of the utter stupidity I've seen/heard from assessors.
For each piece of advice - whether it's from an assessor, a colleague, online, or even a non referee (seriously, 2 of the best pieces of advice I've received have actually been from team coaches!) - take it on board, consider it, let it simmer, analyse it then draw your own conclusions. somebody tells you something about the law, check it yourself. If it seems to contradict or not sit in the law, or doesn't fit with what you've previously heard, then you need to make a decision - do you throw out the new knowledge or the old? What has the presentor of new knowledge said/done to make you believe that the new knowledge is more valid? If you're finding that conflict in advice, then it's suggesting you need to investigate further, ask more questions, then make your decision.
Make all the right noises to the assessor, but decide later if your best way forward is simply to forget everything he said. But at least consider what was offered and make sure you're making an educated, considered decision in that.
I would think that if no attacker is mentioned then there's no reason at all to assume that he broke up an attack
If we're going to make assumptions or extend a question to another possibility, we need to clearly state those.
To further the @CapnBloodbeard Law related comments earlier in the thread... if you are still confused and think caution, consider this:
He's catching the ball (aka deliberately handling) as it is going out for a throw (presumably for his team). By handling the ball deliberately, he's giving the possession to the other team rather than maintaining it for his team.
The _only_ way I'd consider cautioning here (and 95%+ of the time it would only be a consideration) would be if an opponent was challenging him for the ball before it went out of play.
He's catching the ball (aka deliberately handling) as it is going out for a throw (presumably for his team). By handling the ball deliberately, he's giving the possession to the other team rather than maintaining it for his team.
The _only_ way I'd consider cautioning here (and 95%+ of the time it would only be a consideration) would be if an opponent was challenging him for the ball before it went out of play.
Think t his is one of those Law 19 moments where common sense comes into play .
PinnerPaul
RefChat Addict
Player caught the ball in Championship match I was at recently.
Attacker challenging for the ball with defender in close proximity, attacker had back to defender.
Attacker caught the ball, fk to defender's side, no caution issued.
Attacker challenging for the ball with defender in close proximity, attacker had back to defender.
Attacker caught the ball, fk to defender's side, no caution issued.
Last edited:
Charlie Jones
Work Until You Don't Have To Introduce Yourself
I love the difference of opinions (and the odd few saying others are out rightly wrong!) the OP doesn't clearly state details of who's attacking etc. etc. so actually nobody is correct 100% and everyone is guessing and assuming?
although some of you have been making me laugh, and by the sounds of it would claim that even the top referees are wrong - because you say so?
love this forum, so much differing of opinions and thoughts! and god blast FIFA for making so many interpretations!!!
although some of you have been making me laugh, and by the sounds of it would claim that even the top referees are wrong - because you say so?
love this forum, so much differing of opinions and thoughts! and god blast FIFA for making so many interpretations!!!
Yampy
RefChat Addict
If it merits a caution, the caution must be administered. Sometimes, we are guilty of letting emotion cloud our judgement and thinking that we're doing the right thing.
By keeping a player on from Team A when he should be off, punishes Team B and isn't evenhanded treatment. Your assumption is that no one from Team B has noticed your mistake. Both teams deserve to be treated equally.
Padfoot
The Persecuted One
Quite sad really.....all the people who would rather be mates with the players than just do their job and issue the caution.
If you don't caution there, you won't be cautioning for any handball offence for the rest of the game.....not with any credibility anyway.
And if you're not convinced it's a handball caution....don't forget 'acts in a manner which shows a lack of respect for the game...'
If you don't caution there, you won't be cautioning for any handball offence for the rest of the game.....not with any credibility anyway.
And if you're not convinced it's a handball caution....don't forget 'acts in a manner which shows a lack of respect for the game...'
Charlie Jones
Work Until You Don't Have To Introduce Yourself
Padfoot
The Persecuted One
Ah right....obviously that's where I'm going wrong....I hadn't realised we were being paid to stroll around the pitch having an easy life....avoiding taking any action that might make things difficult for us.....
Charlie Jones
Work Until You Don't Have To Introduce Yourself
clearly it is ... maybe if you relaxed a little whilst refereeing that chip on your shoulder would eventually whittle away 
Padfoot
The Persecuted One
clearly it is ... maybe if you relaxed a little whilst refereeing that chip on your shoulder would eventually whittle away
Yes...then I could be 'last weeks ref' as well.....
No thanks, I'll just carry on doing the job properly and leave the incompetent to hopefully one day realise the grave disservice they do to their colleagues......
PinnerPaul
RefChat Addict
I didn't say Championship referee was wrong, just stating what I saw. For what its worth, I wouldn't issue a caution in those circumstances either.
Charlie Jones
Work Until You Don't Have To Introduce Yourself
have you ever thought that you are last weeks ref?
yet instead of the ref that was nice and was fair and let the game flow, your 'last weeks ref' that was 'such a pr**k' and a 'right jobs worth' and the one that 'definitely failed his police course'
because ive heard them all lol
yet instead of the ref that was nice and was fair and let the game flow, your 'last weeks ref' that was 'such a pr**k' and a 'right jobs worth' and the one that 'definitely failed his police course'
because ive heard them all lol
Charlie Jones
Work Until You Don't Have To Introduce Yourself
@PinnerPaul sorry pal, I genuinely wasn't talking about you! lol
PinnerPaul
RefChat Addict
What utter twaddle. You've outdone yourself.
- Status