Referee howler

[OldNavyRef]

343K views · 542 reactions | There's a lot to unpack here, but let's do it in a fair way that doesn't abuse the referee, who will know upon watching this back has made a massive... | By The Referee Forum | Facebook

There's a lot to unpack here, but let's do it in a fair way that doesn't abuse the referee, who will know upon watching this back has made a massive...

www.facebook.com

Seen this video on a Facebook post.

The ref knows they royally screwed up and I think he maybe decides to bend the rules a little in the end.

It does initially look like a foul on red. Then the obviously he shouldn't have blown so quick on the next foul (easy mistake to make when there is a crunchy tackle like that). Then he doesn't caution/dismiss the tackler. Then he clearly uses the lino as a get out of jail free card to allow a goal even though it likely crossed the line after he blew the whistle.

I am genuinely gutted for this ref, he has the same body language I did when I flagged offside for a goalkick.

 

[JamesL]

343K views · 542 reactions | There's a lot to unpack here, but let's do it in a fair way that doesn't abuse the referee, who will know upon watching this back has made a massive... | By The Referee Forum | Facebook

There's a lot to unpack here, but let's do it in a fair way that doesn't abuse the referee, who will know upon watching this back has made a massive...

www.facebook.com

Seen this video on a Facebook post.

The ref knows they royally screwed up and I think he maybe decides to bend the rules a little in the end.

It does initially look like a foul on red. Then the obviously he shouldn't have blown so quick on the next foul (easy mistake to make when there is a crunchy tackle like that). Then he doesn't caution/dismiss the tackler. Then he clearly uses the lino as a get out of jail free card to allow a goal even though it likely crossed the line after he blew the whistle.

I am genuinely gutted for this ref, he has the same body language I did when I flagged offside for a goalkick.

Yep seen this.

The 1st missed foul is totally understandable, they happen. Development advice here, based on where he is when he comes into shot (running backwards) suggests he was too deep and ended up with a behind view of the challenge. Being less deep would have given a better viewing angle and an increased chance of identifying the foul. Easy to say without the whole end to end clip as in how he ended up there in the 1st place.

Clip 2. It's a clear reckless foul (probably in retribution) and it looks very clear the keeper is going to save it. The keeper howler is what throws the referee under the bus. Perhaps, delaying the whistle until the keeper has stopped the ball going in (or not as the case may be) would have saved him the annoyance of the team in blue and a correct outcome of goal (ignoring original foul).

And with all this we then have no sanctions, there's at least 1 each for dissent (and ER for surrounding) and 1 for red for the foul challenge in the build up to the goal.

Would be interesting to get a definitive was the ball over the line before the whistle is blown. Not sure anything could come of that, but it does have a sense of trying to right a mistake, albeit, the wrong mistake to right, given the original unpunished foul.

 

[santa sangria]

I researched this kind of ”accidental” whistle scenario earlier this season as it happened in a match.

In the OP, I think the whistle clearly sounds before the ball is over the line, after the GK has moved, but while the GK is still involved. Here, even if you believe the whistle does not affect the result, I think the goal must be disallowed.

AFAIK accidental whistle is not in the LotG though it is in the futsal LotG (2 refs, 2 whistles, more likely accidents). The LotG cannot cover every scenario though, so maybe the futsal law is useful for comparison: ”If, during play, one of the referees sounds the whistle by mistake, the referees must stop the match if they consider that this action has interfered with play.”

In the OP I would interpret the whistle to have intefered with play.

I saw an incident earlier this season where the ball was rolling into the goal, no one had the ability to play the ball, and the whistle was blown just before the ball completely crossed the line. The referee’s intention was Dogso-advantage goal. But there was an accidental whistle. The goal was given.

I think this is what football expects. Even though any decision was an impossible sell in that scenario. But it is something that could be aligned between big football and futsal in the laws.

 

[JamesL]

I researched this kind of ”accidental” whistle scenario earlier this season as it happened in a match.

In the OP, I think the whistle clearly sounds before the ball is over the line, after the GK has moved, but while the GK is still involved. Here, even if you believe the whistle does not affect the result, I think the goal must be disallowed.

AFAIK accidental whistle is not in the LotG though it is in the futsal LotG (2 refs, 2 whistles, more likely accidents). The LotG cannot cover every scenario though, so maybe the futsal law is useful for comparison: ”If, during play, one of the referees sounds the whistle by mistake, the referees must stop the match if they consider that this action has interfered with play.”

In the OP I would interpret the whistle to have intefered with play.

I saw an incident earlier this season where the ball was rolling into the goal, no one had the ability to play the ball, and the whistle was blown just before the ball completely crossed the line. The referee’s intention was Dogso-advantage goal. But there was an accidental whistle. The goal was given.

I think this is what football expects. Even though any decision was an impossible sell in that scenario. But it is something that could be aligned between big football and futsal in the laws.

Sounds like we have come full circle to the old when does play stop argument a little bit here.

Laws 1-17 do not cover a whistle blown in error but the guidelines to match officials do:

"If the referee blows the whistle in error and play stops, play is restarted with a dropped ball."

I think, as the whistle was not accidental, it was to signal play stopping for a foul challenge, it's not interference. Restart has to be a direct free kick.

Basically the referee blowing the whistle stops play. The referee then has two choices of the ball was in play:
Restart for whatever the whistle was blown for.
Dropped ball if blown in error.

There isn't a way to circumvent the rules/guidelines to award a goal. A goal can only be awarded if before the whistle was blown the ball had wholly crossed the goal line, between the posts and under the cross bar.

 

[Quarryref]

I'm sure we've all had that sinking feeling when you know you've dropped one and there is no good way out .....

I think the overarching principle has to be to prioritise being be correct in Law and then own the mistake and apologise for it.

'Sorry I screwed up and blew too quickly lads. My bad' is better than fudging it and trying to find a way to award the goal. Giving the card for the tackle helps sell it a bit.

Personally, my threshold for dissent in the aftermath is then going right up to the max I feel I can get away with. If it's way over the top you have to do it, but when everyone knows I've screwed up big time, cautioning someone pointing it out doesn't help much.

Of course all this is avoided if he gives the first safe defensive FK. That's one where even if you haven't really seen it properly, everyone's expecting it, so just give it. Nothing wrong with a bit of informed guesswork

 

[RustyRef]

Probably not dissimilar to Simon Hooper blowing up for a free kick for a foul just as the ball was played through to Grealish who has through on goal. As soon as he did it he would have been mortified, just as the referee in this case would have been.

I'm not really interested in missed dissent cautions here, sometimes when you've dropped an absolute clanger you just have to suck it up and accept you are going to get grief. Throwing dissent cautions around would be adding fuel to the fire and would just make matters much worse. Part of me thinks he used the AR well, the other part thinks he chucked him under the bus, no doubt he would have said something like bail me out here, tell me the ball was over the line before I blew. If the AR says it wasn't, and he gives the goal anyway, that makes him compliant in the incorrect decision as well.

Really tricky one, as the "football expects" decision is definitely a goal. I think only referees would question a goal being given in this scenario, pretty sure the main complaints from the reds would have been about the missed foul rather than the goal being given.

 

[JamesL]

Understand tolerance being higher but blue 8 is too obvious to ignore.

The problem I have with no action is it promotes that the referee makes an error, put pressure on him and he will change the decision.

This is where the captain only would work well. Explain you've messed up and what action you can take.

Be interesting to know what promoted the face to face dialogue. Was there a buzz. Did the referee initiate. What was the conversation. Without all that it's hearsay.

Irrespective of the decision here the expectation now, as far as I'm aware is, this behaviour can't be accepted and should be dealt with accordingly.

I think the way to do it is not to start throwing them around but after the facts and decisions are made. Especially blue 8.

 

[Gabriel]

Understand tolerance being higher but blue 8 is too obvious to ignore.

The problem I have with no action is it promotes that the referee makes an error, put pressure on him and he will change the decision.

This is where the captain only would work well. Explain you've messed up and what action you can take.

Be interesting to know what promoted the face to face dialogue. Was there a buzz. Did the referee initiate. What was the conversation. Without all that it's hearsay.

Irrespective of the decision here the expectation now, as far as I'm aware is, this behaviour can't be accepted and should be dealt with accordingly.

I think the way to do it is not to start throwing them around but after the facts and decisions are made. Especially blue 8.

I agree blue 8 is lucky not to be cautioned there. But overall, I don't think that would have helped the referee's match control in this situation. I do feel very sorry for him though - most of us will know what this feels like

 

[santa sangria]

Sounds like we have come full circle to the old when does play stop argument a little bit here.

Laws 1-17 do not cover a whistle blown in error but the guidelines to match officials do:

"If the referee blows the whistle in error and play stops, play is restarted with a dropped ball."

I think, as the whistle was not accidental, it was to signal play stopping for a foul challenge, it's not interference. Restart has to be a direct free kick.

Basically the referee blowing the whistle stops play. The referee then has two choices of the ball was in play:
Restart for whatever the whistle was blown for.
Dropped ball if blown in error.

There isn't a way to circumvent the rules/guidelines to award a goal. A goal can only be awarded if before the whistle was blown the ball had wholly crossed the goal line, between the posts and under the cross bar.

Great post - and yes, it’s still ”that” topic.

You are right, the guidelines in the back of the book/app say (my bold):

”If the referee blows the whistle in error and play stops, play is restarted with a dropped ball.”

So, in the OP, if the ref says to the assessor: ”play was not stopped, I didn’t intend to stop play…” - are we OK with goal?

(Futsal law is much clearer as it has the interfering part!)