The Ref Stop

Penalty or Indirect free kick

L

lee_rob13

New Member
Level 6 Referee
I was watching a game of my friends yesterday.

Attacking team has possession outside the their opponents 18 yard box when play is stopped and the keeper sent off for foul and abusive language. He shouted something to the referee I think about offside in the build up and called him a "cu*t". Clearly a red card was the correct call but he then proceeded to give a penalty to the opposition.

I could be wrong here but I thought for using offensive, insulting or abusive language play was restarted by an indirect free kick, and if the offence occurred in the penalty area this would be taken from the boundary line nearest to where the offence/interference occurred?

Has the ref got this one correct and I'm mistaken?
 
The Ref Stop
All verbal offences are idfk.

Perhaps he missed the change to a change. When ifab changed the law they inadvertently made the offence a DFK (I think it was to do with offences against a match official)
They then circulated a clarification which was put into the next edition to say verbal offences were idfk.
 
lee_rob13 said:
I was watching a game of my friends yesterday.

Attacking team has possession outside the their opponents 18 yard box when play is stopped and the keeper sent off for foul and abusive language. He shouted something to the referee I think about offside in the build up and called him a "cu*t". Clearly a red card was the correct call but he then proceeded to give a penalty to the opposition.

I could be wrong here but I thought for using offensive, insulting or abusive language play was restarted by an indirect free kick, and if the offence occurred in the penalty area this would be taken from the boundary line nearest to where the offence/interference occurred?

Has the ref got this one correct and I'm mistaken?
Click to expand...

Idfk in the goal area ( the six) would be taken on the line
In the penalty area, it be taken where the offence was, subject to the above.
 
JamesL said:
Perhaps he missed the change to a change. When ifab changed the law they inadvertently made the offence a DFK (I think it was to do with offences against a match official)
They then circulated a clarification which was put into the next edition to say verbal offences were idfk.
Click to expand...
That's not quite what happened as I recall it. When the IFAB made offences against a match official punishable by a direct free kick in 2016, some people tried to argue incorrectly, that this should apply to verbal offences, even though the FAQ issued at the same time made it clear that it did not include verbal offences.

It was the fact that some people were apparently not reading the FAQ's and consequently misinterpreting the change, that led to the later clarification that all verbal offences are punishable by an IFK.
 
Peter Grove said:
That's not quite what happened as I recall it. When the IFAB made offences against a match official punishable by a direct free kick in 2016, some people tried to argue incorrectly, that this should apply to verbal offences, even though the FAQ issued at the same time made it clear that it did not include verbal offences.

It was the fact that some people were apparently not reading the FAQ's and consequently misinterpreting the change, that led to the later clarification that all verbal offences are punishable by an IFK.
Click to expand...
Understood. And that's what I meant that the way it was written lead people to believe dissent was now DFK. So obviously he got that part and not the clarofication and subsequent enshrinement. There are so many FAQs I haven't got time ot read them all. I go with what is in the law book, nas the FAQs should only churn out what is in the book anyway although I am sure there are some bad examples knocking around
 
Peter Grove said:
That's not quite what happened as I recall it. When the IFAB made offences against a match official punishable by a direct free kick in 2016, some people tried to argue incorrectly, that this should apply to verbal offences, even though the FAQ issued at the same time made it clear that it did not include verbal offences.

It was the fact that some people were apparently not reading the FAQ's and consequently misinterpreting the change, that led to the later clarification that all verbal offences are punishable by an IFK.
Click to expand...
This is good information and something I wasn't clear on myself. Thanks for clearing that up. Every day is a schoolday.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top