The Ref Stop

dissent by word or action

A

akokkalis

New Member
If you stop a game while the ball is in play to show a yellow card to player for
dissent by word or action.

you restart the game with an indirect free kick..
My question is from where the free kick has to be taken?

From the point that the ball was in play before i stop the game?
Or from the point i show the yellow card?

Thanks
 
The Ref Stop
From where the offence took place i.e. where the player was (a few exceptions for if it is in the goal area or off the field of play).
 
In general, free kicks are always taken from where the offence occurred (apart from a few specific exceptions, as noted by @one). So the free kick is to be taken from wherever the player was when he dissented.
 
akokkalis said:
So from the point i show the yellow card.. ???
Click to expand...
Where do you show the yellow card for dissent? There is no mandate for where you do that (don't get hung up about where that happens). But there is a mandate for where restart (free kick) has to be.
 
Here is an example. There is an appeal for a penalty you wave away. The keeper for attacking team standing on his own penalty spot, from 80 yards away, yells out "that was a f**king pen ref". You consider this dissent and blow the whstle. At this time play/ball is in the attacking penalty area and you are 15 yards away from the ball. You run to the half way line, take the yellow card out and show it to the keeper who is now 20 yards away from you and half way line. Where do you take the free kick? The penalty spot where the keeper was When he yelled out the words.
 
one said:
Here is an example. There is an appeal for a penalty you wave away. The keeper for attacking team standing on his own penalty spot, from 80 yards away, yells out "that was a f**king pen ref". You consider this dissent and blow the whstle. At this time play/ball is in the attacking penalty area and you are 15 yards away from the ball. You run to the half way line, take the yellow card out and show it to the keeper who is now 20 yards away from you and half way line. Where do you take the free kick? The penalty spot where the keeper was When he yelled out the words.
Click to expand...

So you restart game at the point of the dissent...
 
Personally, I would not have stopped play but would have cautioned the goalkeeper when the ball went out of play. This ensures that the law is followed but the innocent team not penalised.
 
LOAFer said:
Personally, I would not have stopped play but would have cautioned the goalkeeper when the ball went out of play. This ensures that the law is followed but the innocent team not penalised.
Click to expand...

Hmm. Maybe we should so that with other fouls, too. Let’s not call the PK, let’s just wait till the ball is out and caution the defender . . . . If you’re going to caution for what happens while the ball is in play, the Laws are pretty clear that you give an IFK. There is certainly no advantage here that would warrant playing on and then going back for the caution. It’s a team sport. Bad actions have consequences to the team. When we soften those consequences, we just make it easier for the misconduct to take place.
 
LOAFer said:
Personally, I would not have stopped play but would have cautioned the goalkeeper when the ball went out of play. This ensures that the law is followed but the innocent team not penalised.
Click to expand...
All the wording in the law about penalising offences talks about them being committed by "a player" - not the team. As far as I'm concerned, if the keeper committed what the referee judges to be an offence, it doesn't matter that the other 10 players didn't. I believe you should penalise the offence by a player as and when it occurs unless (as @socal lurker says) advantage applies, which it doesn't here.
 
socal lurker said:
Hmm. Maybe we should so that with other fouls, too. Let’s not call the PK, let’s just wait till the ball is out and caution the defender . . . . If you’re going to caution for what happens while the ball is in play, the Laws are pretty clear that you give an IFK. There is certainly no advantage here that would warrant playing on and then going back for the caution. It’s a team sport. Bad actions have consequences to the team. When we soften those consequences, we just make it easier for the misconduct to take place.
Click to expand...

No, you have drawn a logical conclusion that does not exist. I do not deny the clarity of the laws on how to restart. That is a different point. There are times when play needs to be stopped and a caution issued immediately. But at other times, I have found the alternative method very effective.
 
I think that there are times when it makes sense to wait and caution for dissent at a break in play, and there are times when it is more beneficial to stop play there and then.
 
zarathustra said:
I think that there are times when it makes sense to wait and caution for dissent at a break in play, and there are times when it is more beneficial to stop play there and then.
Click to expand...
While it may be beneficial to you, the problem for me is that it is also beneficial for the team who has offended (when there is no advantage). Why would you make a decision that benefits the offending team? I don't agree with making black and white incorrect decision to make it easier for myself. There is no flexibility in this. If you deem it an offence (which you do if you cautioned later), and there is no advantage, you must stop play to punish the offence.

Without intending to get personal or offensive, I find that to be weak refereeing. If you have a few years under your belt then you should be able to make the right decision there and manage the consequences accordingly. I can overlook it from an inexperienced referee.
 
Yeah agree - it's either a clear advantage situation or stop the game. A YC for dissent is a direct attack on your match control. If it's worth a YC then you shouldn't just kick it down the road. And when you stop the game and give the card it's important to communicate (via the action, maybe via words and gestures too) so that's it's clear not just to the offender, but to all the players, benches and the great unwashed. IMHO of course.
 
LOAFer said:
Personally, I would not have stopped play but would have cautioned the goalkeeper when the ball went out of play. This ensures that the law is followed but the innocent team not penalised.
Click to expand...

Then you'd be wrong mate. ;) :)

santa sangria said:
Yeah agree - it's either a clear advantage situation or stop the game. A YC for dissent is a direct attack on your match control. If it's worth a YC then you shouldn't just kick it down the road. And when you stop the game and give the card it's important to communicate (via the action, maybe via words and gestures too) so that's it's clear not just to the offender, but to all the players, benches and the great unwashed. IMHO of course.
Click to expand...

Agreed. It's also worth noting that in this particular example given by @one, were the ref to just play on until the next natural stoppage, then the miscreant (in this case the Goalkeeper) would still be on the pitch, when in fact, he should be in the Bin for 10 mins and his team a player short for his dissent. :)
 
one said:
While it may be beneficial to you, the problem for me is that it is also beneficial for the team who has offended (when there is no advantage). Why would you make a decision that benefits the offending team? I don't agree with making black and white incorrect decision to make it easier for myself. There is no flexibility in this. If you deem it an offence (which you do if you cautioned later), and there is no advantage, you must stop play to punish the offence.

Without intending to get personal or offensive, I find that to be weak refereeing. If you have a few years under your belt then you should be able to make the right decision there and manage the consequences accordingly. I can overlook it from an inexperienced referee.
Click to expand...

It depends, entirely on whether it is an "obvious" form of dissent, i.e a player getting in your face or screaming across the pitch during open play should definitely get a caution, although in 5 years and hundreds of games this has only happened to me once.

Every other time this type of dissent took place at a break in play anyway. A penalty, free kick offside etc.

"Cumulative" dissent is more where I would consider waiting, because these situations are less clear cut. I'm thinking the player whose been in your ear with low level whinging for a while. This is normally where I'd employ the stepped approach, and where I as the referee determine when they've crossed the line, which normally happens at a break in play when they come over for another moan about something that doesn't matter.
 
Most dissent I receive is when the ball is out of play anyway e.g. I've awarded a free kick or penalty and the offenders seem free to object.

I once witnessed a game where in the 88th minute, a goalie, from the other end of the pitch yelled out "referee: you are such a c^^t". The whole crowd heard it and I was amazed there was no come back. A clear red in my book
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top