Throw ins- how far can the player get?

[Kes]

I think there is a clear benefit to the player though, that's why they've decided to take it from there. They're throwing it straight to their keeper who has very little opposition, as opposed to the halfway line where players are marked up

In my experience (at grass roots level) I'd say about 90% of the time, the team taking a throw-in inside their opponents half loses possession within a couple of seconds which is of course exactly why players do as you've described above.
I've learned that there is no real answer to this one except to do as others have suggested and choose carefully your hill to die on!!
If it happens in my game and there are vociferous protests from the opposing team/benches then I'll likely act on it. If nobody bats an eyelid then I'm just going with what that games expects and playing on.

 

[JamesL]

In my experience (at grass roots level) I'd say about 90% of the time, the team taking a throw-in inside their opponents half loses possession within a couple of seconds which is of course exactly why players do as you've described above.
I've learned that there is no real answer to this one except to do as others have suggested and choose carefully your hill to die on!!
If it happens in my game and there are vociferous protests from the opposing team/benches then I'll likely act on it. If nobody bats an eyelid then I'm just going with what that games expects and playing on.

Id add to this that once I'd chosen which hill to die on I would be consistent with its application. For example, if one team gets away with it, but then complains, well you can't have your cake and eat it.

 

[Runner Ref]

This is another case of the higher powers not doing their job and enforcing it. Which is why I wouldn't expect someone at the lower levels to enforce it. Which just adds to my theory that the 8 second law will quickly be forgotten about or stretched. Football is a simple game that is made to be more complicated than it needs to be.

 

[refstew]

That is exactly the basis.

Referee "stops" player taking a throw from the wrong place, but they are already in motion and the ball slips out - retake.

Referee allows or fails to react to player taking a throw from the wrong place - foul throw and it gets turned over.

If you're going to do the latter deliberately (perhaps if a player has already had multiple warnings and you see him heading off down the line again anyway), I find it particularly helpful to be stood in line with the correct position with your arm out as you blow. Once the player realises he'll have to jog 15-20 yards back up the pitch to argue with you and to get to the point the throw should have been taken, he will generally accept he's made a mistake.

I do similar , stand in line with where the ball went out. I tell both teams before a game that I'll let them have 2or3 yards not 5or10. It usually works

 

[Russell Jones]

This is another case of the higher powers not doing their job and enforcing it. Which is why I wouldn't expect someone at the lower levels to enforce it. Which just adds to my theory that the 8 second law will quickly be forgotten about or stretched. Football is a simple game that is made to be more complicated than it needs to be.

You seem to be under the misapprehension that the ‘job’ of the officials at the highest levels is to slavishly enforce the letter of the law in order to best support their grassroots colleagues. In reality, their role is to best meet the needs of their employers in a fair and consistent way. When gate receipts at a typical EPL are in excess of £10M ( to say nothing of the even bigger sums from TV and other revenue), delaying the game by getting ‘picky’ over a throw in location is rightly unlikely to ever be a priority.

For what it’s worth, throw ins taken too close to the team’s own goal are a pet peeve of mine and I personally do my best to avoid it happening. I just don’t see it as reasonable to expect my professional colleagues to in any way support these efforts ….

 

[Runner Ref]

You seem to be under the misapprehension that the ‘job’ of the officials at the highest levels is to slavishly enforce the letter of the law in order to best support their grassroots colleagues. In reality, their role is to best meet the needs of their employers in a fair and consistent way. When gate receipts at a typical EPL are in excess of £10M ( to say nothing of the even bigger sums from TV and other revenue), delaying the game by getting ‘picky’ over a throw in location is rightly unlikely to ever be a priority.

For what it’s worth, throw ins taken too close to the team’s own goal are a pet peeve of mine and I personally do my best to avoid it happening. I just don’t see it as reasonable to expect my professional colleagues to in any way support these efforts ….

No, officials jobs are to apply the laws of the game. If their employers want them to steer away from this, they need to clearly state this in a separate laws of the game from the lower levels. Laws that state they will do as they're told in order for the game to make more and more money.

Whether you like it or not, the higher levels are role models to those below them. When the lower levels see their role models get away both stuff, they follow. Clamp down as the higher levels and it will soon trickle down.

Saying they are there to meet their employers needs is borderline corruption. They are there to officiate within the laws of the game. Not keep their paymasters happy. Do you genuinely believe Howard Webb would go on TV and say this?

But your comment about money pretty much sums up how football is going. Money first, football and fans 2nd and 3rd (in whichever order you like)

 

[Russell Jones]

No, officials jobs are to apply the laws of the game. If their employers want them to steer away from this, they need to clearly state this in a separate laws of the game from the lower levels. Laws that state they will do as they're told in order for the game to make more and more money.

Whether you like it or not, the higher levels are role models to those below them. When the lower levels see their role models get away both stuff, they follow. Clamp down as the higher levels and it will soon trickle down.

Saying they are there to meet their employers needs is borderline corruption. They are there to officiate within the laws of the game. Not keep their paymasters happy. Do you genuinely believe Howard Webb would go on TV and say this?

But your comment about money pretty much sums up how football is going. Money first, football and fans 2nd and 3rd (in whichever order you like)

There are already large portions of the LOTG that are fundamentally different at the professional level … VAR has been the driver of that.

I totally agree that the higher levels are role models and that some of the way they are asked to interpret the Laws makes life harder for lower levels. I just don’t blame those individuals in any way for this and think it’s naive to expect / hope that this will in any way change.

Referees who are well paid / employed to fulfil their role will inevitably do just this. They know full well that if they choose not to, there will be hundreds of other officials who will willingly take their place. This is no different to in all other professions.

And all the above is, as you say, driven by money. Football at the higher levels is, even more so than other sports, no longer a diverting pastime but instead a multi billion pound industry. You may not like this (and I totally understand and respect that position) but to rail against it and blame the country’s best officials for the consequences is, IMO, an unhelpful waste of time.