Throw in (one handed)

[ladbroke8745]

There is a debate on a Facebook group in which a young player, under13, had one arm. Specially adapted shirt to help him too.
Anyway, he was charged with taking the throw ins for his team.
One handed.
He apparently was able to get the ball behind his head and then throw it some 25 yards.

Laws state both hands must be used.

A lot of people are going on about the inclusive element with kids. Let him take the throw in etc.
But this kid is throwing the ball 25 yards one handed.

For me, it should not be allowed.
They're gaining a huge advantage by having this law relaxed.
Some are saying laws should be relaxed for kids to feel included.
Again I disagree, as when do you stop relaxing it? What laws are you relaxing? One ref may relax one law whilst another relaxes a different one.

Back to initial topic, what's your thoughts on the one arm throw?

 

[Sheffields Finest]

I don’t think there is any special dispensation within the law but I’d be certainly letting it go!

It says 2 feet must be touching the ground for a throw in but we have amputee football... stop looking for issues that aren’t there... football for all!

 

[QuaverRef]

What do you want him to do, grow another arm? Of course it needs to be relaxed if he has a disability. Why is that a question?

 

[ladbroke8745]

So when the law says the throw must be taken with 2 hands, with ball behind the head, and this is not adhered to, you would let it go just because the thrower has 1 arm?

The only way I can possibly see a 13 year old throw it that far is over arm throw like a keeper.

 

[PP62]

Life's hard enough for this kid without jobsworths putting their twopenneth in. I remember playing open age when two 16 year old twins joined the team. One of these had the lower part of one arm missing. When he took throw ins and opponents shouted foul throw, they were told in no uncertain terms where to go.

 

[QuaverRef]

So when the law says the throw must be taken with 2 hands, with ball behind the head, and this is not adhered to, you would let it go just because the thrower has 1 arm?

The only way I can possibly see a 13 year old throw it that far is over arm throw like a keeper.

100% I would be letting it go, he’s disabled for god sake. Good look standing on the pitch as a referee and giving a foul throw against him in front of all the parents on the sideline.

 

[ladbroke8745]

There are 10 other players that could take the throw.

They have realised the kid can throw it that far one handed over any other player who would throw it about 5. But to do this they need the referee to agree. So whilst the opposing team are taking throw ins 5 yards in distance this team have the advantage of him throwing it one handed 25 yards?
Fair play for all?

 

[es1]

I don't think this is straightforward at all.

Was he one of the full backs or was he used to take all throws, simply because he has a long throw?

His team have a pretty big advantage because he can take the throw in illegally, I bet I could launch a ball twice if not three times further with one arm than by following the laws properly.

 

[PP62]

I have no idea what's going on in your head.

 

[Ciley Myrus]

Wait, if this is regulated U13 football then the LOTG have to be applied !! Sensibly, yes, but that means, the occasional foul throw or retake if needed but, blatantly allowing a player in the game to do something outwith the LOTG is not on.
What some folk are really saying here, is, if both hands/arms are not functioning, we will permit them to kick it in !!?????

I referee disabled football on a reg basis and the rules are modified to suit. Perfect

Can I ask those saying its ok, at what age level do we deem it not to be ok??

Pointless having a referee on hand to apply LOTG if we are going to make allowances/modifications that are not in the book.

and before anyone thinks am needing castrated, my partner is registered disabled so certainly no discrimination going on here.



edit, where I am, 13s boys is official games, 13s girls is 7 a side.

 

[QuaverRef]

Would any of you seriously call foul throw if this were to happen and feel good about it morally? Let’s not forget that these are kids we are talking about and football at that age is about being included and accepted with others. Not to single out individuals for what they can and can’t do for something as petty as a long throw.

 

[Ciley Myrus]

Would any of you seriously call foul throw if this were to happen and feel good about it morally? Let’s not forget that these are kids we are talking about and football at that age is about being included and accepted with others. Not to single out individuals for what they can and can’t do for something as petty as a long throw.

so at what age as you saying no to this please?

I "might" be more agreeable should the league or ref association issue a memo re this individual but its not a referee decision!!
Morally I want him (or most kids enjoying the game) to score the winning goal but that does not mean I can accidently pass the ball for him to do so...sorry no, regulated competition, regulated ref, no go for me

 

[es1]

I honestly don't know what I'd do if I came across this situation, delighted I've never come across anything similar.

To straight up allow it or stop it? Really not sure, pros and cons for both

 

[QuaverRef]

so at what age as you saying no to this please?

I "might" be more agreeable should the league or ref association issue a memo re this individual but its not a referee decision!!
Morally I want him (or most kids enjoying the game) to score the winning goal but that does not mean I can accidently pass the ball for him to do so...sorry no, regulated competition, regulated ref, no go for me

If I’m honest, I couldn’t even target an age group as I’m not exactly going to deal with on a regular basis but certainly not 12 year olds. The FA drill into everyone about making everyone feel included at this age. How on earth does singling him/her out like this make them feel like that?

 

[es1]

If I’m honest, I couldn’t even target an age group as I’m not exactly going to deal with on a regular basis but certainly not 12 year olds. The FA drill into everyone about making everyone feel included at this age. How on earth does singling him/her out like this make them feel like that?

The way I see it though is you're (potentially) giving him and his team a big advantage over the others. How's that fair?

 

[QuaverRef]

The way I see it though is you're (potentially) giving him and his team a big advantage over the others. How's that fair?

You’re right, I am giving an advantage to a child with one arm because he can throw further than everyone else. How selfish of me

It makes me laugh that referees on here would happily not use cards for some types of fouls or situations and instead ‘manage the situation’ to help them develop but a disabled child take a throw in, we can’t have that!

 

[Ciley Myrus]

If I’m honest, I couldn’t even target an age group as I’m not exactly going to deal with on a regular basis but certainly not 12 year olds. The FA drill into everyone about making everyone feel included at this age. How on earth does singling him/her out like this make them feel like that?

Its not for the referee to judge on though. If its a regulated competitive 13s score stands game, then, we don't get to make that call.
Well we kind of do, and its a no !
Can someone same age with a less functioning leg jump on a bike for the 400m (or equal something to replace something?) in the area competition??

 

[Ciley Myrus]

You’re right, I am giving an advantage to a child with one arm because he can throw further than everyone else. How selfish of me

It makes me laugh that referees on here would happily not use cards for some types of fouls or situations and instead ‘manage the situation’ to help them develop but a disabled child take a throw in, we can’t have that!

we don't get to make that call (assuming that is a competitive regulated scores count game of football), sorry no, no way.
More than welcome to play, but to actively break the LOTG, no sorry, no chance. Opens huge can of worms as to what is and what's not acceptable.
The fair solution (afterall, the ref is charged with officiating to ensure fairness) would be to also allow the other team to do the throw the same.
Sorry but the referees personal viewpoint is null and void.

there are 21 other players on the park adhering to the LOTG, no chance you destroy (cant even say bend as it does not go far enough) the laws to cater for the other 1

what's next, he plays in goal but we agree if he touches it with hand that's a save and play stops? Would they put him in goal? Prob not, as its not entirely compatible with his disability. Same logic follow he should not be taking the throws.

 

[QuaverRef]

we don't get to make that call (assuming that is a competitive regulated scores count game of football), sorry no, no way.
More than welcome to play, but to actively break the LOTG, no sorry, no chance. Opens huge can of worms as to what is and what's not acceptable.
The fair solution (afterall, the ref is charged with officiating to ensure fairness) would be to also allow the other team to do the throw the same.
Sorry but the referees personal viewpoint is null and void.

Absolutely fine with that. We are all trained to enforce the LOTG but I also think we have to be sensible in some situations and I personally wouldn’t want to be the referee arguing with parents/manager about not letting a disabled child take a throw in. I think the ‘can of worms’ would be a hell of a lot bigger in that scenario than us breaking that particular law

I’d be interested to know if referees who give a foul throw against him/her also strongly enforce things like the goalkeeper 6 second rule, correct colour tape etc to 12 year olds at grass roots level as well because I’d be confident that the majority don’t.

 

[Ciley Myrus]

Its nothing like the same. How can anyone promote fair play and equality if (and I know this is far fetched but its the best example I can find), its 0-0 and the only goal comes from his illegal throw?
How on earth is that equal and inclusive and overall, fair?

Its not, its the polar opposite, it would be treating the disabled child differently, and, that is surely NOT the intention of anybody.
The disabled child would get the same allowance on his foul throw, (maybe a touch more) than any other player, that's fairness and being treated equal
Chucking the ball 4 times as far as anybody else in a manner clearly nothing near the required procedure is not equal. Nowhere near.

nobody is saying he cant play. Nobody is saying he cant take the throw, But if he does take the throw it needs to be something along lines as every other player taking a throw on the pitch. That's inclusion.