The Ref Stop

Penalty area foul

C

cZulu

New Member
Level 7 Referee
Defending player misses ball during a challenge and kicks attacker across both ankles. Clear foul, right?

But this was in the penalty area, the player didn’t go to ground and the attacking team did not appeal.

I (almost) instinctually blew and awarded the penalty. Cue an almighty amount of grief and a sin bin for dissent.

It’s an annoying one because I “didn’t have to give it” but my eyes saw a clear foul and I acted as I usually do anywhere else on the pitch.

How do you guys deal with this in the box? Do you have more tolerance or wait a second or two for the appeals to start?
 
The Ref Stop
You did the right thing. It was a careless challenge so that's a foul and it's in the pen area so that's a penalty. Your gut will guide you better than the appeals of players.
 
I would wait a second or two, not for appeals, but for advantage. In one of my first games I blew for a clear handball in the box and before I'd finished the peeep the ball was in the net. Of course I had to disallow the goal.

Since then at least once a season my delayed reaction despite frantic appeals from the attacking team who cannot understand how I could possibly have missed that blatant ... oh. "Play on, advantage," I say pointedly, as they realise they've scored. Then I ask the celebrating attackers if I can claim the assist.

That slight pause does also give you the option of seeing players' reactions. If you've seen a foul you must give it though. You did the right thing.
 
I've heard it said, 'no appeal, no penalty' on the basis that being the only person who has seen something, is an express-route to chaos
Although I'm not black & white on this advice, I do lean towards it. That said, the whistle for a penalty is often on instinct and can occur before any chance for appeal
 
cZulu said:
Defending player misses ball during a challenge and kicks attacker across both ankles. Clear foul, right?

But this was in the penalty area, the player didn’t go to ground and the attacking team did not appeal.

I (almost) instinctually blew and awarded the penalty. Cue an almighty amount of grief and a sin bin for dissent.

It’s an annoying one because I “didn’t have to give it” but my eyes saw a clear foul and I acted as I usually do anywhere else on the pitch.

How do you guys deal with this in the box? Do you have more tolerance or wait a second or two for the appeals to start?
Click to expand...
Sounds like a simple foul, but 'football expects' a higher tolerance in the penalty area, that's just how it is. You have given a penalty that may be correct in law, but you have surprised the players and have had to caution for dissent because of it. What would the reaction have been had you not given it? Sounds like they would have forgotten in a couple of minutes.
 
JH said:
Sounds like a simple foul, but 'football expects' a higher tolerance in the penalty area, that's just how it is. You have given a penalty that may be correct in law, but you have surprised the players and have had to caution for dissent because of it. What would the reaction have been had you not given it? Sounds like they would have forgotten in a couple of minutes.
Click to expand...

Isn't this what causes the problem? Well inconsistency is what causes the problem, but I don't see anywhere in the LOTG that talks about a higher tolerance in the penalty area. This comes down to individual associations / leagues and how they ask for the laws to be applied, which in my opinion enhances the problem.
I agree that for a game management basis you might make different calls in the penalty area to other areas of the pitch, I do it, but we really shouldn't! I disagree with the no appeal no call policy, some teams / players cry murder if they get sneezed on, others wouldn't say a word if they got shot.
I would've 100% given a penalty for the incident you described. It's a clear foul and the sooner those sort of offences get punished as they should, the more consistent the games will be and the better they will be.
 
TSHudson said:
Isn't this what causes the problem? Well inconsistency is what causes the problem, but I don't see anywhere in the LOTG that talks about a higher tolerance in the penalty area. This comes down to individual associations / leagues and how they ask for the laws to be applied, which in my opinion enhances the problem.
I agree that for a game management basis you might make different calls in the penalty area to other areas of the pitch, I do it, but we really shouldn't! I disagree with the no appeal no call policy, some teams / players cry murder if they get sneezed on, others wouldn't say a word if they got shot.
I would've 100% given a penalty for the incident you described. It's a clear foul and the sooner those sort of offences get punished as they should, the more consistent the games will be and the better they will be.
Click to expand...

I'd put it this way:
  • Of course a clear foul should be called in the PA
  • I also disagree with the extreme version of the "no appeal=no call," but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be aware of player reactions in evaluating when physical contact crosses the line
  • Outside the PA, it is more appropriate to tinker with the trifling standard to control a game--but the PA is not the place to do that
  • A PK has a harsh punishment, so we should be sure before we call it--outside the PA we may be "mostly sure" and make the call for management purposes, but the PA is not the place to do it
 
socal lurker said:
A PK has a harsh punishment, so we should be sure before we call it--outside the PA we may be "mostly sure" and make the call for management purposes, but the PA is not the place to do it
Click to expand...
I'm not sure I'd ever give a decision on "mostly sure" I might choose to give or not give a decision for an offence I know has happened, depending on where it takes place (inside or outside PA). But we should not be guessing on if something has happened or not. If you're not 100% sure something has happened, you can't give a decision.
 
TSHudson said:
I'm not sure I'd ever give a decision on "mostly sure" I might choose to give or not give a decision for an offence I know has happened, depending on where it takes place (inside or outside PA). But we should not be guessing on if something has happened or not. If you're not 100% sure something has happened, you can't give a decision.
Click to expand...

Every challenge in a game, you are (maybe subconsciously) making a decision, Foul or no foul? Deciding that there is no foul is giving a decision in its own right.
 
TSHudson said:
I'm not sure I'd ever give a decision on "mostly sure" I might choose to give or not give a decision for an offence I know has happened, depending on where it takes place (inside or outside PA). But we should not be guessing on if something has happened or not. If you're not 100% sure something has happened, you can't give a decision.
Click to expand...

I'm really curious how much you've reffed. You have some very strong purist opinions that don't seem consistent with the practicalities of experience.

I'll stand by the reality that refs are going to be more sure before they call a PK than before they call a foul at midfield, especially in a game that ref is trying to simmer down.
 
TSHudson said:
Isn't this what causes the problem? Well inconsistency is what causes the problem, but I don't see anywhere in the LOTG that talks about a higher tolerance in the penalty area. This comes down to individual associations / leagues and how they ask for the laws to be applied, which in my opinion enhances the problem.
I agree that for a game management basis you might make different calls in the penalty area to other areas of the pitch, I do it, but we really shouldn't! I disagree with the no appeal no call policy, some teams / players cry murder if they get sneezed on, others wouldn't say a word if they got shot.
I would've 100% given a penalty for the incident you described. It's a clear foul and the sooner those sort of offences get punished as they should, the more consistent the games will be and the better they will be.
Click to expand...

Maybe 'higher tolerance' isn't the right phrase. The point is a penalty can often be a game changing decision so its common sense to make sure you get these calls right more often than not. If you erroneously give a free kick to a defender, or a throw the wrong way - you will get some moaning but no one is going to be in your ear for long or even after the game. It makes perfect sense that you take more time on the game changers and err on the side of caution if not 100% correct - something you can relax a little on the other 95% of decisions.
 
socal lurker said:
I'm really curious how much you've reffed. You have some very strong purist opinions that don't seem consistent with the practicalities of experience.
Click to expand...
5 seasons, normally two games a weekend. Can't say these "purist" views have ever been an issue in any of my games, which always seem to go very well, with the exception of maybe two or three in all 5 seasons.

I honestly don't see how you can give a decision without being sure? Not saying I'm always right, I'm sure there's hundreds of decisions I've given incorrectly in reality, but the decisions are always "there is a foul / handball / whatever there" not saying "I'm 90% sure there's a foul, so I'll give it on the basis of probability"
 
TSHudson said:
5 seasons, normally two games a weekend. Can't say these "purist" views have ever been an issue in any of my games, which always seem to go very well, with the exception of maybe two or three in all 5 seasons.

I honestly don't see how you can give a decision without being sure? Not saying I'm always right, I'm sure there's hundreds of decisions I've given incorrectly in reality, but the decisions are always "there is a foul / handball / whatever there" not saying "I'm 90% sure there's a foul, so I'll give it on the basis of probability"
Click to expand...

No-one is suggesting that but every call is a decision. You 'cutting the grass' to say no no PK is a decision as you're deciding that no offence has been committed.
 
TSHudson said:
That's exactly what post 8 says.....
Click to expand...

Okay. You're 95% sure that a foul has occurred on halfway. 11 players from red appeal, as does their bench. The 'accused' player and his teammates even stop because they're expecting you to blow. But because you're only 95% sure you're waving it away? That is ludicrous.
 
TSHudson said:
That's exactly what post 8 says.....
Click to expand...
Hmm When I read #8 subsection 4 I think about smart refereeing. Things like small contact with big effects... like attacker makes accidental contact knocking defender off balance. In a crowded midfield it might pass, but leading to a 1-on-1 it’s an easy foul to give.

We do change our tolerance based on context and sometimes we use probability, perhaps only in non-critical situations. ...incidental contact or marginal shove unclear if back or shoulder in front of a bench that goes crazy... it’s only human that we shift our tolerance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top