Although not having experienced a ‘rolling subs’ shoot out , I fail to see any issue in law. Is it not right that whilst off the pitch they are subs and whilst on it they are players? And therefore subs can’t take part , no need for change
Misapplication of Law
- Thread starter RichardRef
- Start date
Feel we have a apples and oranges situation here.
Slightly different in that FUTSAL doesn't have a limit to number of subs (as I understand it) and can be made on the fly so impossible to track who is on at the end.
At the moment we have a very clear and understandable law (for the vast majority at least). Once a game ends and a penalty shootout is required to determine the outcome then only those on the pitch at the end can take part. Bearing in mind that the law provides for limited substitutions.
It's only by modification that grassroots are allowed repeat substitutions. So why would we change the law to account for a modification that only applies to grassroots?
And if we did we'd end up with more errors because some games it wouldn't matter who took part and others it would. And generally, as we've seen in the past, when some laws are modified in one competition and not on others it leads to errors (example sin bins not being used in FA Cup).
Your final objection is entirely based on the idea that this new law would be applied inconsistently. So the way to stop that problem is....don't apply the new law inconsistently?
Grassroots - aka, where the referees are often on their own, are least likely to have NARs to help manage/track subs and consequently, where mistakes are more likely to occur. Seems like that would be the highest priority for modifying the laws to me?
And lawmakers aren't afraid of using grassroots as a testing ground for their poorly-thought-through ideas (see the first messy iteration of sin bins). At least this poorly-thought-through idea is designed to help refs track events rather than make it tricker.
Grassroots - aka, where the referees are often on their own, are least likely to have NARs to help manage/track subs and consequently, where mistakes are more likely to occur. Seems like that would be the highest priority for modifying the laws to me?
And lawmakers aren't afraid of using grassroots as a testing ground for their poorly-thought-through ideas (see the first messy iteration of sin bins). At least this poorly-thought-through idea is designed to help refs track events rather than make it tricker.
What are you talking about? The existing law is applied consistently apart from this edge case in the OP...
Very simple only those on field of play take a kick. Really easy, simple and consistent to apply.
If it ain't broke and all that ...
I said myself that the law you we worded more clearly, but it isn't, and my point was how can a competition do something that so blatantly contradicts the law.
Referees just need to be more on the ball at managing subs when it is a cup game until such time as IFAB decide to make the law more clear, which they almost certainly won't.
RefJef
RefChat Addict
To be fair, it is probably very simple when you referee at a level that everyone knows what they are doing, have NARs and possibly even a 4th official.
Things are very different for those of us that operate in and amongst the weeds of grassroots football (and this is, I believe, what @GraemeS is alluding to.).
Nothing is simple when you are on you own, on a Sunday morning, in the dog and duck cup, excitement is rising and temperatures sky rocketing as you approach the end of 120 mins of football. What is being suggested, any team sheet named player can be one of 11 penalty takers would make life simpler at this level.
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
Subtle difference between repeat subs (with proper ball out of play, and logged) and flying subs (with ball in play and not logged by the referee)… perhaps explains.
If it ain't broke, why does this thread exist?
one
RefChat Addict
I guess the entire football and the whole of lotg is broke. Look at the number of threads in this forum.
IMO, this law is not unlike some other laws that need a bit more awareness/effort to enforce, especially at grassroots. Similarly there are other ones that are not common and some refs don't know about. This thread is because a referee didn't know the law and no matter what we change it to, if they dont bother to know it, they can still missapply it. And if we were to change laws because some referees don't know about them, the entire book has to change.
Having said that, if a change is beneficial at all levels I'm all for it. But not because some ref's don't bother to know about them and have to guess when they have to make a decision. The first thing any ref should do before doing a sudden death game is to read Law 10 or a summary of it.
You say it makes it easier. But I disagree. It is easy now as it is one rule. You are proposing different rules for different games which increases the probability of error.
I'm not opposed to a view whereby any 11 players from a match day squad could be chosen as the 11 penalty takers, I just don't see why it should be any different for games with return substitutes to a game without return substitutes. I don't think that makes life easier or negates the chance of the error mentioned in the OP - I think it makes people more likely to make that error as you remove a one size fits all approach and start adding in complications.
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
In grassroots matches with one referee, in tournaments, or when there is a queue of matches… with flying subs… it makes sense to let the teams choose their takers from the whole team. It’s simpler, faster, better.
With flying subs the ref does not have a record of the 11 on the field. At full time in grassroots with flying subs, especially in tournament football with other teams hanging around, tiny pitches, especially with kids, especially in cultures that like a huddle… it is unrealistic for the referee to know who the 22 who finished the match were - or to police this. Please understand this.
This is not the typical set of circumstances in the UK so your milage may vary. In other countries, culture and competition rules may vary. I have refereed KFTPM at grassroots with flying subs a lot. When our comp rules were to only select from the 22 on the field I could not enforce this. I had to trust the coaches (and I would mention it in pre-match). Now that the coaches just send the next player it is much quicker and more inclusive. I am still looking down at the list of numbers as it grows with takers to avoid duplicates - just as with any other big match shoot out!
I'm not disputing the potential amendment for flying subs (although I think it would be easier to stop flying subs in the first place) - I'm just referring to return substitutions (which was the scenario in the OP)
I never said it should specifically be for return subs? I said it would help with games that have return subs to reduce the need for the referee to take a complicated record and remove the possibility of getting it "wrong" at the end. And that this issue is worse at lower levels where return subs are more likely and referees are more likely to be on their own. And that IFAB have a history of testing their ideas at grassroots.
Those are the reasons for the proposed amendment. But there's no reason it couldn't also work at higher levels.
Right, apologies, I though you were suggesting an amendment specific for matches with return subs. I still wouldn't want it personally, but I can understand where you're coming from now.
RichardRef
New Member
Outcome for this was:
- match to be replayed at non-offending teams home ground.
- offending team to incur all costs for replay.
- appeals committee accept that referee was at fault but that clubs have the responsibility to know the laws.
Runner Ref
RefChat Addict
Very uncomfortable with this bit.
Ideally clubs know the laws, referee should know them.
I suppose they wouldn’t necessarily say, but has the referee been allowed to get off with it with no comeback?
RichardRef
New Member
Grassroots kids football so leagues are in no position to give referees a ‘rest’. There aren’t enough of us as it is.