The Ref Stop

IFAB law changes 1/7/21

we as referees should try create some sort of flowchart for this.

was it deliberate? If yes foul
Does it make body bigger? If yes foul
Does it lead to instant goal/gs opportunity? If yes foul
Does it rebound of teammate hand? If yes no foul


Something along these lines
 
The Ref Stop
Degnann said:
we as referees should try create some sort of flowchart for this.

was it deliberate? If yes foul
Does it make body bigger? If yes foul
Does it lead to instant goal/gs opportunity? If yes foul
Does it rebound of teammate hand? If yes no foul


Something along these lines
Click to expand...
Actually, if IFAB keeps the wording "goal scoring opportunity" is not part of it. Only if the player scores a goal immediately then you call the offence. If a goal scoring opportunity is created but Keeper saves the shot for a corner, then you go with the corner.

Team mate shoudn't be in the chart, it irrelevant just like many other irrelevant thing.

Both team mate and GSO are going be questioned because they were part of the previous laws. They are no longer relevant.
 
one said:
Actually, if IFAB keeps the wording "goal scoring opportunity" is not part of it. Only if the player scores a goal immediately then you call the offence. If a goal scoring opportunity is created but Keeper saves the shot for a corner, then you go with the corner.

Team mate shoudn't be in the chart, it irrelevant just like many other irrelevant thing.

Both team mate and GSO are going be questioned because they were part of the previous laws. They are no longer relevant.
Click to expand...
I must admit I hadn’t actually read the ifab release. Good to know theres no gso now. Also glad to see circumventing the law at goal kicks is now cautionable
 
Degnann said:
we as referees should try create some sort of flowchart for this.

was it deliberate? If yes foul
Does it make body bigger? If yes foul
Does it lead to instant goal/gs opportunity? If yes foul
Does it rebound of teammate hand? If yes no foul


Something along these lines
Click to expand...

It's not making the body bigger, it's making the body unnaturally bigger. And we have to take into account what the player is doing and where the arm would naturally be in that context. I think historical guidance is helpful here. The concept of biggering (my word for it) came from trying to identify well disguised deliberate acts--the player who deliberately puts the arm away from the body to take away the passing lane so that it will "inadvertently" be hit by the ball and not be an offense.

And as @one already noted, the attacker handball has been narrowed again so that it applies solely to an accidental handball by the person who scores.

While the constant tinkering drives me nuts, I think this iteration of handling is far better that what we got in the revisions the last two years. We're largely back to where we were before, with biggering moved from a referee training concept to being express in Law 12, plus not letting accidental handlers score (which was kind of happening already, as the threshold for referees finding those types of handling to be deliberate was really low).
 
one said:
Not sure what you mean. If by non-accidental you mean deliberate then it's an offence, assist or not.
Accidental assists are no longer offences. It's pretty clear to me.
Click to expand...
What is accidental?
What is deliberate?
Is there a third way?

Is a non-deliberate unnaturally big armed handball assist deemed an accident?
 
santa sangria said:
What is accidental?
What is deliberate?
Is there a third way?

Is a non-deliberate unnaturally big armed handball assist deemed an accident?
Click to expand...

Oh, c'mon. This isn't that hard (well, except for defining unnaturally bigger).

If deliberate, it's an offense.
If unnaturally bigger, its an offense.
If the person who handled the ball scores immediately, its an offense.

Each is a separate consideration, and one event could meet none, one, or more than one of the criteria.
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
santa sangria said:
What is accidental?
What is deliberate?
Is there a third way?

Is a non-deliberate unnaturally big armed handball assist deemed an accident?
Click to expand...
What is life? What is football? What is .... :)

I guess if we want 300000 pages of lotg we can explain all those. Honestly we can't have it both ways. They tried to be precise and very black and white with complex definitions we complained. Now they have made it simple and gave us more discretion to decide.

Anyway, as I said IMO it's a huge improvemet.
 
socal lurker said:
It's not making the body bigger, it's making the body unnaturally bigger. And we have to take into account what the player is doing and where the arm would naturally be in that context. I think historical guidance is helpful here. The concept of biggering (my word for it) came from trying to identify well disguised deliberate acts--the player who deliberately puts the arm away from the body to take away the passing lane so that it will "inadvertently" be hit by the ball and not be an offense.

And as @one already noted, the attacker handball has been narrowed again so that it applies solely to an accidental handball by the person who scores.

While the constant tinkering drives me nuts, I think this iteration of handling is far better that what we got in the revisions the last two years. We're largely back to where we were before, with biggering moved from a referee training concept to being express in Law 12, plus not letting accidental handlers score (which was kind of happening already, as the threshold for referees finding those types of handling to be deliberate was really low).
Click to expand...
Plus, it simplified by removing the concepts of ball to hand and distance. These are implicit if you look at then in terms of either deliberate or "unnaturally bigger".
 
There seem to be some sections missing from that document.

In the summary at the beginning, it mentions the following changes in Law 12:
3. Disciplinary action – Sending-off offences
3. Disciplinary action – Team officials.
Click to expand...

However in the section giving the actual new wording, those clauses are not there.

Edit: I've just looked at the other language versions and they're even worse - they have the same omissions from the detailed wording section about sendings-off and team officials but they also reference an additional change in the summary, supposedly a change to the law on goal celebrations that is found neither in the English version, nor in their own detailed wording sections.
 
Last edited:
OK, so in reference to my previous post, it turns out I was wrong. I emailed the IFAB about it and they pointed out to me that the sections I thought were missing (or mis-matches), were actually because of the following:
You will note that this appears in a section entitled ‘Changes affecting more than one Law’ so that where changes affect more than one Law the details are given here as this is more efficient and it is unnecessary to list every one in the section which is entitled ‘Individual Law changes’
Click to expand...
 
Is there anything on the intent part in awarding a penalty?

I read somewhere that intent had been removed from the IFAB laws for penalty incidents. Is this true?
 
socal lurker said:
??? "Intentional" was removed for all fouls many years ago (with deliberate added in to handling only).
Click to expand...
This. The element of intent, in relation to physical contact (or attempted contact) fouls was removed from the laws way back in 1995.

The term "deliberately" in relation to handling offences, which had been there since 1897 (although they used the word "wilful" at that time) was retained.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top