RefSix

Junior/Youth stupid assistant - his behaviour helps his son to be sent off

JH

RefChat Addict
#41
As I have been told: Sensible refereeing is to never allow a quick free-kick unless it's going sideways or backwards. Especially not a shot on goal.
Just to clarify: This is referring to free-kicks in and around the PA, I didn't make that clear. Nobody is going to stop a quick free-kick being played forward from defence to midfield etc.
 

Ciley Myrus

RefChat Addict
#42
There is a distinction between 2B and, council park 28

Am doing an international trial this afternoon, given the chance to go quick, yes fire in
Yesterday with 2 pub teams......very unlikely.
 

JH

RefChat Addict
#43
There is a distinction between 2B and, council park 28

Am doing an international trial this afternoon, given the chance to go quick, yes fire in
Yesterday with 2 pub teams......very unlikely.
There is, but what's the difference in quick free-kicks? Quality and pitch doesn't matter, if the team wants it quick it's all on them how it goes, not like deciding whether to play advantage.

All I'm saying is being sensible could've helped me a few times.
"Can we go quick ref?"
"Yes"
Shot.
Goal.
Anarchy.

If I'd have said no, the attacking team wouldn't have been fussed and the defending team wouldn't have gone mental and lost their faith in me. Sensible.
 

one

RefChat Addict
#45
Just what I have been told from my 2B peers, they must be doing something right.
2B or not 2B. I personal prefer using a pen.

Seriously though, the further they (we) go up the chain, the further apart they seem 2 B from us mere mortals. Specially right on top, they don't make it easy for us at grassroots.
 
Likes: JH

JH

RefChat Addict
#46
If they've waited long enough to ask then surely the chance to take it quick has passed anyway.
Agree, and that was a mistake on my part. I was right near the incident though and they put the ball down and asked straight away. However, if they just went and the keeper was on his post sorting his wall, the same situation would have happened. All could've been stopped with a "no" though.
 

zarathustra

RefChat Addict
#47
I just don't see why you would intentionally disadvantage the team that have been fouled. If they don't take the kick from the right place, or the ball is moving, or you want to talk to the offender or issue a caution, or allow a sub etc then by all means stop them from going quickly, but to stop them simply because you want to make your life easier seem a little bit unfair.

I am of course talking about "proper" quick free kicks, unless you as the referee do something which gives the defending team the impression the kick will be on the whistle then I don't see why a quick free kick would cause you match control issues
 
#48
Just to add i would say the question about taking it came about 5-8 seconds after he was fouled. The same player fouled took the kick.

As soon as i said yes i blew the whistle so players knew it was being taken. The two defenders in the wall were well over 10 yards but the keeper was trying to move them.

I suppose the question is what time frame counts as "a quick one". Is it instant or within 2-3 seconds?

I am being advised on here not to blow the whistle in this scenario but apart from my loud voice shouting "away you go" how would all on the FOP know i have restarted the game and that he can take it? But maybe they don't need to know.
 

Mintyref

RefChat Addict
#49
Not really a right or a wrong answer regarding the quick-taking of free kicks - it's just a call you make at the time.

For me, anywhere near the box where the "quick" free kick is a shot on goal, I'm standing over the ball and doing the ceremonial.

I get the whole "it's about the team who've been disadvantaged by being fouled" angle but, in reality, they're not going to get the advantage of their "free kick expert" being able to line up his shot, plot his trajectory, where he's going to place/bend/lift the ball into the goal and all without his run-up being impeded by either a moving ball or a defender right on top off him as he brings his leg back to shoot whilst the ball is in open play. Sure, he's got to circumvent the wall, but in the grand scheme of things, with a direct shot at goal, there's little difference in the "advantage" stakes.

A quickly taken shot at goal after the whistle has gone is simply taking advantage of a goalkeeper being caught unawares or even actually exploiting the fact that everybody is now expecting a ceremonial one. I know there's no law against it, but I'm making life easier for everybody (including me) by doing what the game expects. :):cool:
Its rarely the reason for a quick kick, it's because the bright midfielder sees the opportunity to play a forward in with an unexpected pass.......
 

JH

RefChat Addict
#50
I just don't see why you would intentionally disadvantage the team that have been fouled. If they don't take the kick from the right place, or the ball is moving, or you want to talk to the offender or issue a caution, or allow a sub etc then by all means stop them from going quickly, but to stop them simply because you want to make your life easier seem a little bit unfair.

I am of course talking about "proper" quick free kicks, unless you as the referee do something which gives the defending team the impression the kick will be on the whistle then I don't see why a quick free kick would cause you match control issues
There are lots of things that we do for match control that may advantage or disadvantage teams. Do you penalise a goalkeeper for holding the ball for over 6 seconds? IDFK would be a huge advantage to the attacking team and they are entitled to it, yet you ignore it for match control. As I posted in another thread, a SG1 official was stressing at a recent meeting the importance of keeping match control even by illegitimate (by this I mean not strictly following law) means - you can take that as not doing their job properly, or you can take that as being smart.
 

zarathustra

RefChat Addict
#51
There are lots of things that we do for match control that may advantage or disadvantage teams. Do you penalise a goalkeeper for holding the ball for over 6 seconds? IDFK would be a huge advantage to the attacking team and they are entitled to it, yet you ignore it for match control. As I posted in another thread, a SG1 official was stressing at a recent meeting the importance of keeping match control even by illegitimate (by this I mean not strictly following law) means - you can take that as not doing their job properly, or you can take that as being smart.
Some officials in SG1 also blatantly ignore some laws, OFFINABUS being a recent example, where a Burnley player's shower of abuse was so bad the BBC had to blur his mouth during the replays on Match Of The Day.

I had a quick free kick in a game a couple of weeks back, maybe 5 or so meters outside the penalty area, it was very quick player was fouled, I blew, then player got the ball and took the kick maybe all in under 10 seconds, it led to a shot on goal which resulted in a corner, how many players complained about that? Not a single one, not a peep from any body.

However, if the player had stood around for a little bit, waited until the defending team had started setting the wall up and then I let them take it I imagine there would have been hell to pay. The problem is not quick free kicks, the problem is referees allowing players to mill around for a bit and then allowing them to take the kick while the defence are setting the wall up, that is what causes players to get irate
 

JH

RefChat Addict
#52
Some officials in SG1 also blatantly ignore some laws, OFFINABUS being a recent example, where a Burnley player's shower of abuse was so bad the BBC had to blur his mouth during the replays on Match Of The Day.

I had a quick free kick in a game a couple of weeks back, maybe 5 or so meters outside the penalty area, it was very quick player was fouled, I blew, then player got the ball and took the kick maybe all in under 10 seconds, it led to a shot on goal which resulted in a corner, how many players complained about that? Not a single one, not a peep from any body.

However, if the player had stood around for a little bit, waited until the defending team had started setting the wall up and then I let them take it I imagine there would have been hell to pay. The problem is not quick free kicks, the problem is referees allowing players to mill around for a bit and then allowing them to take the kick while the defence are setting the wall up, that is what causes players to get irate
Fine, that situation went well for you. Next time maybe it won't and maybe you'll end up with a couple of dissent cautions and a goal instead of a ceremonial free-kick. Sometimes you have to protect yourself, especially at grass roots when players are not going to hold back if they think you've wronged them. It's just like allowing a goal from a pass back to the keeper after an injury, you should allow the goal, there's nothing you can do in law, but if you don't want a riot, you need to improvise.
 

Ben448844

RefChat Addict
#53
As I have been told: Sensible refereeing is to never allow a quick free-kick unless it's going sideways or backwards. Especially not a shot on goal.
I strongly disagree with that. I think that sometimes as refs we forget that we are there to facilitate the game and not to 'manage' it to make life easy for us. Take man city's first goal on Sunday for example. The interpretation of "sensible refering" above would've prevented that and that would be a huge negative for football to prevent those situations just because it makes it easier for the referee.
 

JH

RefChat Addict
#54
I strongly disagree with that. I think that sometimes as refs we forget that we are there to facilitate the game and not to 'manage' it to make life easy for us. Take man city's first goal on Sunday for example. The interpretation of "sensible refering" above would've prevented that and that would be a huge negative for football to prevent those situations just because it makes it easier for the referee.
As I clarified, I was referring to kicks in the immediate vicinity of the PA, City's was a bit further out, nothing wrong with it. It's not my advice anyway, it's what I've been told by people well above me.
 

Brian Hamilton

I am the storm
Observer/Tutor
#55
Just what I have been told from my 2B peers, they must be doing something right.
As I clarified, I was referring to kicks in the immediate vicinity of the PA, City's was a bit further out, nothing wrong with it. It's not my advice anyway, it's what I've been told by people well above me.
Either they are your peers and equals or they're not. If you're dropping levels without dropping names, in the hope to add credibility to your posts, then stop it.

They (2Bs) referee at a far different level to you and the expectations are very different at their level. As someone who watches 2Bs, they don't always get it right and from time to time, people like me help them get better. I've not seen one yet who lets a quick free kick be taken anywhere around a penalty area (unless awarded to the defending team).
 

Sheffields Finest

Maybe I'm foolish, maybe I'm blind!
#56
How to spice up a boring game.... allow a quick FK.... goal goes in and your sprinting back doing a Mike Dean fist pump next to the striker in the goal huddle! 😇😇
 

JH

RefChat Addict
#57
Either they are your peers and equals or they're not. If you're dropping levels without dropping names, in the hope to add credibility to your posts, then stop it.

They (2Bs) referee at a far different level to you and the expectations are very different at their level. As someone who watches 2Bs, they don't always get it right and from time to time, people like me help them get better. I've not seen one yet who lets a quick free kick be taken anywhere around a penalty area (unless awarded to the defending team).
You got me, I misused the word 'peer', I meant people I talk with, not that I'm equal to them (obviously I'm not a 2B). Why in the world would I drop names? I'm saying they are 2B to demonstrate their experience, nothing more, nothing less. You then go on to either mistype or completely agree with the advice I was sharing. Strange.
 
#58
Either they are your peers and equals or they're not. If you're dropping levels without dropping names, in the hope to add credibility to your posts, then stop it.

They (2Bs) referee at a far different level to you and the expectations are very different at their level. As someone who watches 2Bs, they don't always get it right and from time to time, people like me help them get better. I've not seen one yet who lets a quick free kick be taken anywhere around a penalty area (unless awarded to the defending team).
I'm a little black and white (due to disability). For me all games should play to the same LOTG - but i know they do not.
 

zarathustra

RefChat Addict
#59
Fine, that situation went well for you. Next time maybe it won't and maybe you'll end up with a couple of dissent cautions and a goal instead of a ceremonial free-kick. Sometimes you have to protect yourself, especially at grass roots when players are not going to hold back if they think you've wronged them. It's just like allowing a goal from a pass back to the keeper after an injury, you should allow the goal, there's nothing you can do in law, but if you don't want a riot, you need to improvise.

But in my situation the only way to "improvise" would have been to invent some sort of infraction as an excuse to pull play back for a ceremonial free kick.

This was the very definition of a quick free kick, but, it was taken from the right place, the ball was stationary, it was a careless trip which didn't warrant a talking to, and there were no injuries or substitutions that needed to be dealt with.

Even if I wanted to stop the free kick there was no good reason to do so, and to have tried to pull it back would have invited problems from the attacking team.
 
Top