WC Final - Argentina vs France

[PinnerPaul]

Not that I don't agree with you...
But @Big Cat raises a really valid point. What is the actual point in the law being written down if we look at it and shrug our shoulders. Lots of other laws fall into that category I know.
I'm torn. A very very big part of me agrees with you. And then there's this small niggly thing that says it's expressly written down what should happen in this scenario... AND we have tech to prove it.

6 seconds James - I regularly see GKs take 20 seconds in the Championship, BigCat and me heard one of our top referees tell a room full of referees that he will NEVER penalise it because he has been told not to. As you say there are many more that need addressing, this example isn't one of them.

IF you are penalising this, shouldn't they have been cautioning all the subs in the tournament who invaded the playing area and surrounds for those big goal celebrations?

 

[PinnerPaul]

.

Bear with the long post and I suspect I may offend some with this post.

How can anyone who understands what refereeing or even football is about ask for this goal to be disallowed? Unless we are looking for obscure ways of somehow discrediting either the refereeing here or the team. I am amused that this has even attracted a debate and so many posts.

Would we also caution both these subs for entering without permission? As well as any and ALL the subs who ever enter the FOP for goal celebration? Very often when substituting and the player who comes off from the far side and has to go around, cuts one of the corners if play is on another end, will you caution him and disallow a goal of it happens at that moment in every case?

To give you a picture, imagine yourself doing a cup final (or equivalent if you are not in England) and one team scores an equaliser in the 90th minute with no one in the defending team protesting against any decisions . While the team is celebrating your AR tells you quietly that one of their subs had his foot on the touch line while watching the action or warming up on the side. Will you disallow the goal? If you do (and I don't believe you would) you better say your refereeing career goodbye. If we don't do something so pedantic in a grassroot game how do we expect it to happen in a WC final?

You may say foot on the touchline is different to this case where subs were about a yard in. No it is not as we either apply the law to the wording it has been written or we don't. Otherwise neither case clearly had no impact in play.

Yes as officials we apply the laws, but in the framework of being fair (and safe). A good example to follow is the encroachment into the penalty area at a penalty kick. It is only punished if the offender has an impact on play.

Spot on!

 

[GraemeS]

Two wrongs don’t make a right, but had the French shot that was saved in the last few minutes gone in, we would/could have been having a similar discussion:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1604650967194308608

(the video is in portrait, so you may need to click on it to see it full screen (which you need to do))

I've tried to watch this 4 times and I just can't look away from how incredible a save that was!

 

[santa sangria]

Bad law + law tweaks = column inches - grassoots behaviour

 

[deusex]

Thanks for posting that. Very interesting.

This bloke is also a mind games champion. This happened in Tasmania.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1222803639372275712

I'm fine with this. The referee cautioned him and he doesn't get to do it again.

Martinez got away with it for ages in both his KFTPM before the referees found their long lost cards.

 

[JamesL]

6 seconds James - I regularly see GKs take 20 seconds in the Championship, BigCat and me heard one of our top referees tell a room full of referees that he will NEVER penalise it because he has been told not to. As you say there are many more that need addressing, this example isn't one of them.

IF you are penalising this, shouldn't they have been cautioning all the subs in the tournament who invaded the playing area and surrounds for those big goal celebrations?

I'm not penalising it... I'm just debating what the law says and how that fries my brain!!

 

[Redster]

I'm not penalising it... I'm just debating what the law says and how that fries my brain!!

Not penalizing it by stopping play, but surely once the ball is gone the 4th is getting you over to have some words/issue one or two cautions?

Not only are they off the bench, out of the technical area, some of them are 10' on the FOP!

I would have thought Elfath would stomp that.

 

[JamesL]

Not penalizing it by stopping play, but surely once the ball is gone the 4th is getting you over to have some words/issue one or two cautions?

Not only are they off the bench, out of the technical area, some of them are 10' on the FOP!

I would have thought Elfath would stomp that.

If you are dealing with it you have to do I properly or not at all.
Given we seem to agree that we don't want to stop play and disallow the goal then we kind of have to sweep it away under the carpet.
Also, seems as though there is a directive of subs on to celebrate goals is not an issue that needs to be dealt with at this WC so would stick out a mile

 

[socal lurker]

If you are dealing with it you have to do I properly or not at all.
Given we seem to agree that we don't want to stop play and disallow the goal then we kind of have to sweep it away under the carpet.
Also, seems as though there is a directive of subs on to celebrate goals is not an issue that needs to be dealt with at this WC so would stick out a mile

Forgive me for nit-picking, but under no circumstances would we stop play for those subs coming on, as they were not interfering. It is only a question of whether to disallow the goal and whether to caution.

(That said, I agree it is problematic to caution for something that would mandate wiping the goal without wiping the goal--that would be (at least theoretically) a protestable error of law as the R would have documented the facts that meant the goal should not have been given.)

 

[JamesL]

Forgive me for nit-picking, but under no circumstances would we stop play for those subs coming on, as they were not interfering. It is only a question of whether to disallow the goal and whether to caution.

(That said, I agree it is problematic to caution for something that would mandate wiping the goal without wiping the goal--that would be (at least theoretically) a protestable error of law as the R would have documented the facts that meant the goal should not have been given.)

Bad wording on my behalf. Nit pick away

 

[Peter Grove]

For what it's worth, a colleague of mine sent a query to the IFAB (some years ago, I might add, not in response to this specific incident) asking whether a goal should be disallowed in such circumstances.

Here's their reply:

"The referee must judge the exact nature/reason for the extra person being on the field of play and if there was no impact at all then the goal could be allowed."

I agree with those who say that this section of the law is badly written. In my opinion, when the law talks about a goal being scored with an extra person on the field of play from the team scoring the goal, I think they're really talking about a team that had been playing with twelve players on the pitch, undetected by the officials until after the goal was scored (or where someone comes on and interferes with play) - not about a scenario where a substitute (or even several) have overstepped the sideline just before a goal is scored, and with no possible impact on the scoring of the goal.

 

[PinnerPaul]

I'm not penalising it... I'm just debating what the law says and how that fries my brain!!

Gets you nowhere James.

My brain has long since burnt out - watching officials wear the same colour as a GK in at least half a dozen games every week in the top 2 leagues, does that to a man!

 

[PinnerPaul]

Not penalizing it by stopping play, but surely once the ball is gone the 4th is getting you over to have some words/issue one or two cautions?

Not only are they off the bench, out of the technical area, some of them are 10' on the FOP!

I would have thought Elfath would stomp that.

Redster are you a tabloid journalist in disguise?

Look at the still, its TWO players on the pitch, the ball has crossed the line and would hate to play in one of your games if that's 10 yards?

And as for cautions, what happened in the rest of the tournament after the goal celebrations involving the subs, their mums and half the population of the nation involved?

"Only 2 standing, 1 giving instructions" is never really going to be enforced at this level is it?

 

[ChasObserverRefDeveloper]

Redster are you a tabloid journalist in disguise?

Look at the still, its TWO players on the pitch, the ball has crossed the line and would hate to play in one of your games if that's 10 yards?

And as for cautions, what happened in the rest of the tournament after the goal celebrations involving the subs, their mums and half the population of the nation involved?

"Only 2 standing, 1 giving instructions" is never really going to be enforced at this level is it?

This grew as an issue in the Premier League over the two Covid seasons with no spectators allowed. Substitutes watched without warming up or even pretending to, and goal celebrations tended to include them.
The ridiculous World Cup rules allowing subs to be selected from the whole squad were always going to result in the mass celebrations we saw throughout the competition.

 

[PinnerPaul]

This grew as an issue in the Premier League over the two Covid seasons with no spectators allowed. Substitutes watched without warming up or even pretending to, and goal celebrations tended to include them.
The ridiculous World Cup rules allowing subs to be selected from the whole squad were always going to result in the mass celebrations we saw throughout the competition.

Excellent point re the subs being effectively the whole squad - presumably any suspended players were not supposed to be on the bench - I doubt that was enforced either!

 

[socal lurker]

Excellent point re the subs being effectively the whole squad - presumably any suspended players were not supposed to be on the bench - I doubt that was enforced either!

Wasn't a lot of that to enforce as the reluctance to give 2CT seemed to extend to those who had a caution in a prior game! IIRC, there were only one or two players the whole WC who actually served a suspension. (There were some others who would have but the second was in the last game their team would play.)

 

[mctones]

What is the actual point in the law being written down if we look at it and shrug our shoulders. Lots of other laws fall into that category I know.

Interesting discussion on this thread and one that is often debated on the forum for other scenarios I am sure.

It seems strange to me that on the one hand we say how poorly written the laws are, but then on the other hand criticise referees that apply different interpretations. Quite simply you can’t have it both ways, either a referee is asked to interpret the laws and spirit of the game before them as best as they can, or they just read verbatim what they should do.

If the latter and we want clearly defined laws that cater for all and every scenario, that would run to a treatise in three volumes!!! This is not what we have, and to be honest not something we should ever advocate for!

 

[RustyRef]

The way I look at it is at almost every grass roots game in England there will be someone stood on the pitch during the game. No technical areas, so just as managers that do have TAs come out of them, those that don't step onto the pitch. Subs warm up on the pitch even though they shouldn't. If a goal is scored whilst this is happening no one notices, and it doesn't matter as it hasn't had any impact on the goal.

The fact there are loads of cameras at a WC final shouldn't make it any different. The subs got caught up in the emotion, and had zero impact on the goal that was scored, so for once I like the IFAB response on this.

 

[Murri O]

This grew as an issue in the Premier League over the two Covid seasons with no spectators allowed. Substitutes watched without warming up or even pretending to, and goal celebrations tended to include them.
The ridiculous World Cup rules allowing subs to be selected from the whole squad were always going to result in the mass celebrations we saw throughout the competition.

The mass celebrations do look good though. (Rightly or wrongly.)

Thoroughly enjoyed the big pile ons at the games. Just adds to the occasion.

 

[GraemeS]

The way I look at it is at almost every grass roots game in England there will be someone stood on the pitch during the game. No technical areas, so just as managers that do have TAs come out of them, those that don't step onto the pitch. Subs warm up on the pitch even though they shouldn't. If a goal is scored whilst this is happening no one notices, and it doesn't matter as it hasn't had any impact on the goal.

The fact there are loads of cameras at a WC final shouldn't make it any different. The subs got caught up in the emotion, and had zero impact on the goal that was scored, so for once I like the IFAB response on this.

So we're filing this under "law we all agree we can just ignore" rather than "law that makes you LWR if you ignore" then?

I'm sorry, but I still don't particularly find that a satisfying conclusion. Some of these "OK to ignore" laws are going to be fiddly to fix (like the 6-second problem), but I think this is an easy fix: If, after a goal is scored, the referee realises, before play restarts, that an extra person was on the field of play when the goal was scored and that in the referees opinion, that additional person influenced or was involved in scoring of the goal...

I have no problem with codifying referees judgement into law in some situations - I have a problem when it's written as black and white but the expectation is actually that we're supposed to see the grey that isn't there.