Indirect free kick taken quickly
- Thread starter StevenG8
- Start date
-
- Tags
- indirect free kick
one
RefChat Addict
There are numerous references in law that imply a free kick can be taken quickly. This is one example in law 12
"If the referee plays advantage or allows a ‘quick’ free kick for an offence which ‘interfered with or stopped a promising attack’, the YC is not issued"
In regards to whistle, this is the back of the book as "Practical Guidelines for Match Officials". It pretty much gives the option to the referee to have the FK on the whistle or not and when to communicate it.
Whistle
The whistle is needed to:
....
restart play for:
• free kicks when the appropriate distance is required
...
The whistle is NOT needed to:
restart play from:
• most free kicks, and a goal kick, corner kick, throw-in or dropped ball
...
If the referee wants the player(s) to wait for the whistle before restarting play
(e.g. when ensuring that defending players are 9.15m (10 yd) from the ball at a
free kick) the referee must clearly inform the attacking player(s) to wait for the
whistle.
"If the referee plays advantage or allows a ‘quick’ free kick for an offence which ‘interfered with or stopped a promising attack’, the YC is not issued"
In regards to whistle, this is the back of the book as "Practical Guidelines for Match Officials". It pretty much gives the option to the referee to have the FK on the whistle or not and when to communicate it.
Whistle
The whistle is needed to:
....
restart play for:
• free kicks when the appropriate distance is required
...
The whistle is NOT needed to:
restart play from:
• most free kicks, and a goal kick, corner kick, throw-in or dropped ball
...
If the referee wants the player(s) to wait for the whistle before restarting play
(e.g. when ensuring that defending players are 9.15m (10 yd) from the ball at a
free kick) the referee must clearly inform the attacking player(s) to wait for the
whistle.
There is very little that is special about an IFK - a goal can't be scored directly from it, and the referee should have his arm in the air until that second touch is taken to mean a goal can be scored.
In pretty much every other respect, they can be treated exactly the same as a DFK.
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
All the above is correct... however... in the real world...
If you are giving an IDFK for anything other than offside, and if you giving an IDFK in an attacking area, for e.g. playing in a dangerous manner, like a sliding tackle that doesn’t connect, or a backpass, or an overhead kick that nearly hits someone in the face... well, you are likely going to have to manage the players, the situation, a wall, some explanation, something...
Maybe (we’ve seen on TV) the one in a billion case of of backpass IDFK taken quickly leading to goal. OK it is possible.
But in the other 99.99999% of cases IMHO be prepared to go and take control of any (non-offside) IDFK.
I gave two PIADM IDFKs in a game last week - both nailed on - but the players went mental - at least in my games the players have no idea that falling on the ball between your legs, nearly kicking someone in the face or sliding in and missing causing a player to evade and lose the ball ... they have no idea that these might be IDFK offences, so they need help!
one
RefChat Addict
Firstly I had to make sure you had the number of 9's right. Not an easy one. Secondly you have to adjust your numbers, there is more than one in a billion chance that an offside IFK can be in or around your own penalty area.
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
Great vid.
That is a very harsh backpass call IMHO.
That defender did not “deliberately kick” the ball to the goalkeeper, they blocked a pass.
And then there is no need to prevent the quick IDFK.
Sadly, and hate to throw a colleague under, two poor moves IMHO. But we can learn from this.
If you feel guilty about a call with kids/grassroots then run in and get in the way and take the ball, then it’s easy to say it’s on the whistle!
one
RefChat Addict
Firstly this was not a an offence IMO. Secondly I would not have intervened if it was. There would have been two mistake by the keeper, picking up the ball and then giving it to the opponent. A goal would have been fair.
Kes
I'll Decide ...
Agreed.
I have however, in the past given a DFK for overly aggressive sliding/lunging challenges that whilst they didn't connect, caused the other player to leap into the air for personal safety. I know that this is normally classed as PIADM but unless I'm mistaken, Law 12 doesn't say there has to be contact for a DFK rather than an IDFK to be awarded.
Last edited:
one
RefChat Addict
Yep. If contact it's direct. But no contact is not necessarily indirect. Last sliding example above is easily attempting to trip for me which is direct. You can also punish attempting to kick or strike with DFK.Agreed.
I have however, in the past given a DFK for overly aggressive sliding/lunging challenges that whilst they didn't connect, caused the other player to leap into the air for personal safety. I know that this is normally classed as OIADM but unless I'm mistaken, Law 12 doesn't say there has to be contact for a DFK rather than an IDFK to be awarded.
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
Keeday
Formerly known as 'Ref' on RefereeForum
Not necessarily true, you can lower your arm when it’s clear that a goal isn’t going to be scored so if an IFK from offside is going out to the side then I’ll lower my arm when the ball is still in the air
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
What's old is new again . . . for a long time the R had discretion to drop the arm once it was clear a goal wasn't going to be scored. Then the powers that be decided (in the '90s, I believe; perhaps because they thought refs were too sloppy) that the arm had to be held up until the second touch. Then, I believe it was two years ago, they went back to the old (and obviously logical) standard--since the only need for the signal is if the ball goes untouched into the net, there is no reason to keep it up once it can't happen.