shouting leave it

#1
During my lads match today a close fought game with us leading 5-4 they had a corner when ball crossed in supposedly one of our defenders shouted leave it has he went for the ball the ref blew up and gave a penalty for it (the ref was from there team) is this a correct descision
 

Ciley Myrus

I came in like a wrecking ball?
#4
Total guess, he was not biased, he probably simply just did not know.
Given offences which do not involve actual contact are Indirect, its possible he was not being biased but just lacking knowledge.
 
#7
Thanks everyone its confirmed what i thought i believed it was indirect free kick at best and maybe a quiet word with players im not going to say he was been biased it could just be that not sure on rules but because of this decision game ended draw which is a shame has it was a top of the table clash both level on points and it still remains that way
 

RustyRef

Moderator
Staff member
#8
Thanks everyone its confirmed what i thought i believed it was indirect free kick at best and maybe a quiet word with players im not going to say he was been biased it could just be that not sure on rules but because of this decision game ended draw which is a shame has it was a top of the table clash both level on points and it still remains that way
No, that isn't right. If you give the IDFK then the only permissible outcome in law is a caution. You are stopping play for an act of misconduct, so if you go down that route you have no option but to caution.

It scares me how such a big a percentage of referees still believe players have to put a name on it, you can't say leave it, etc. And then go onto compound the first error by making a second one in giving an IDFK without cautioning. You have to believe it is a deliberate attempt to deceive an opponent. It happened in a game I was observing on yesterday, the home team played a cross field ball across the midfield, a player was going to control it but the team mate beyond him loudly shouted "leave it". There was no away player anywhere near either player, but they all stopped and then berated the referee when he, totally correctly, played on. The it was obviously my fault as I had an observers jacket on, so I then spent 5 minutes trying to explain the law to them.
 

WilliamD

Well-Known Member
#9
Yeesh. Was verbal distraction ever a DFK??

Shouts to penalise “Leave it” when said between teammates is my pet peeve and as @RustyRef says there must be referees our there giving it. Best this year was when a player was going nuts (with the ball in play) at me for not giving a “leave it”. I blew the whistle, cautioned him for dissent, told him to google the laws, and restarted with an IDFK.
 
#10
Absolutely not.
1> its rare to penalise this.
2> if you do , its a IDFK

sorry but if that is what happened then you have been wronged.
Almost correct. It's an IDFK plus a caution. Without the caution, you can't award the IFK.
A great example of a biased ref. If you had shouted leave it it's always an indirect free kick. How'd the ref justify a penalty there?
This is quite an appalling an absurd comment.
 

JamesL

Well-Known Member
#11
Almost correct. It's an IDFK plus a caution. Without the caution, you can't award the IFK.
Can you explain this notion? Take away verbal distraction ( as its a mandatory) but if I read this right ypu are saying it cant be an indirect free kick unless there is a caution... I am prpbably reading what you have said wrong.

In terms of OP indirect free kick as per law 12.2 and caution as per 12.3. Verbal offence is listed as ifk offence and i think you might be going for commits any other offence, not mentioned in the Laws, for which play is
stopped to caution or send off a player?

Apples and oranges, I know.
 

GraemeS

Well-Known Member
#12
Can you explain this notion? Take away verbal distraction ( as its a mandatory) but if I read this right ypu are saying it cant be an indirect free kick unless there is a caution... I am prpbably reading what you have said wrong.

In terms of OP indirect free kick as per law 12.2 and caution as per 12.3. Verbal offence is listed as ifk offence and i think you might be going for commits any other offence, not mentioned in the Laws, for which play is
stopped to caution or send off a player?

Apples and oranges, I know.
I think you've nailed it here - the verbal distraction offence is a caution and only a caution. In the absence of any DFK offence or a specifically listed IFK offence, you're stopping play only to give a caution - the correct restart in that case in an IFK.

You can't give the IFK without a card as it's not listed as a specific IFK offence.
 

JamesL

Well-Known Member
#13
I think you've nailed it here - the verbal distraction offence is a caution and only a caution. In the absence of any DFK offence or a specifically listed IFK offence, you're stopping play only to give a caution - the correct restart in that case in an IFK.

You can't give the IFK without a card as it's not listed as a specific IFK offence.
Ah, but it is; which was my point in case really.

"Is guilty of dissent, using offensive, insulting or abusive language and/or
gestures or other verbal offences"
 
#14
Yeah thought that was implied :)

As for the statement that the ref was biased: I've never ever seen someone give a direct free kick for this, and the guy was a part of the opponent's team.
 
#15
Not quite correct.

If CAN be an IFK. If the referee deems it unfairly verbally distracting to the opponent, it's a caution and THEN (and only then) an IFK.
Yeah thought that was implied :)

As for the statement that the ref was biased: I've never ever seen someone give a direct free kick for this, and the guy was a part of the opponent's team.
 
#16
Can you explain this notion? Take away verbal distraction ( as its a mandatory) but if I read this right ypu are saying it cant be an indirect free kick unless there is a caution... I am prpbably reading what you have said wrong.

In terms of OP indirect free kick as per law 12.2 and caution as per 12.3. Verbal offence is listed as ifk offence and i think you might be going for commits any other offence, not mentioned in the Laws, for which play is
stopped to caution or send off a player?

Apples and oranges, I know.
Where are you seeing verbal offence as an IFK offence?
Yeah thought that was implied :)

As for the statement that the ref was biased: I've never ever seen someone give a direct free kick for this, and the guy was a part of the opponent's team.
Bias would lead you to putting down a PK because somebody fell over, not simply making up offences. This is simply ignorance.
 

RustyRef

Moderator
Staff member
#17
This isn't complicated folks. The only place that "verbally distracts" appears in law is on page 100, under cautions for unsporting behaviour.
 

JamesL

Well-Known Member
#18
Where are you seeing verbal offence as an IFK offence?

Bias would lead you to putting down a PK because somebody fell over, not simply making up offences. This is simply ignorance.
Page 96.

Is guilty of dissent, using offensive, insulting or abusive language and/or
gestures or other verbal offences"

Its pedantry at its worst I will admit :)
 
#19
Page 96.

Is guilty of dissent, using offensive, insulting or abusive language and/or
gestures or other verbal offences"

Its pedantry at its worst I will admit :)
Which version? The 17/18 version, p96 is the Law 12 heading.
And I think you'll find that those are all falling under misconduct.....
 

Peter Grove

Well-Known Member
#20
Page 96.

Is guilty of dissent, using offensive, insulting or abusive language and/or gestures or other verbal offences"

Its pedantry at its worst I will admit :)
It's not just pedantry, its a misinterpretation of the law. The verbal offences being referred to, as is made clear in the "Details of all Law changes" section, come under the category of "offences against a match official."