Just because it isn't anywhere near enough of a foul to be a penalty. There's contact, but not necessarily contact with consequence which is what top level referees are now told to take into consideration.
WHU v Bre
- Thread starter ladbroke8745
- Start date
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
“Now”? Hasn’t trifling been a concept for an awfully long time?
Kinsleyr
Member
But surely it is also utter rubbish! If a foul is a foul outside of the box it is a foul inside the box. Anyone who says different is screwing around as a referee as you are not following the rules of the game and are using rules that are particular to you as a person.
It isn't using laws that are particular to you as a person - it is applying the laws in the way that is expected in the modern game. Football expects the bar for penalties to be higher and, in terms of key match incidents, it is vital that you and virtually everyone else is 100% sure about those decisions.
I thought like you when I started refereeing back in the late 90s. I gave plenty of those types of decisions, convinced I was right, and each time not only were defenders aggrieved but - more importantly - attackers were surprised. I quickly realised I was doing things differently to other referees and outside of what everyone else expected. As coverage of games has changed over the past 20 years or so, this has got clearer and clearer.
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
I don’t want to be snarky, but this is a naive view. Try thinking of it this way. When it comes to giving a PK, we are only calling 100% fouls. Other places on the field, we are also managing the game and setting tone. At midfield, we may well, depending on the tone and temperature of the game, call the 75% foul or even the 50% foul as part of managing the game. But we are never going to give a 50% foul in the PA to manage the game. PKs need to be solid fouls. Again, I don’t mean to be snarky or condescending, but if you can’t wrap your mind around this concept, it is going to be very diff
A penalty is sometimes the hardest decision to make, but if you make the right call, it's often the easiest decision to sell... As previously said it's when you give one for something that nobody expects that you might find yourself in an uncomfortable situation.
I'll avoid saying that there are no rules, only laws. Oops I said it
Referees always have been and always will be a little creative with the laws for certain situations. The classic example is when a player is trying to time waste shielding the ball by the corner flag, fouls get given there that would most certainly never be given anywhere else on the pitch, just because you want to avoid the complete car crash of someone coming in and wiping him out. Having a higher bar for challenges in the penalty area is no different.
The Ginger Ref
Active Member
Fortunately refereeing is subjective, as you have been advised (probably by referees who are far more experienced that you or I):
You either take advice on board, or you ignore it. You have chosen the latter.
If you want to award a penalty for anything you consider to be a foul in the box, go for it. I doubt you'll make many friends in the process and you're going to be in for a long 90 minutes, but at least your sticking to the rules.
I agree with you in principal, but I think this is a step too far the other way.
Players expect to get a penalty for a foul in the box. So not unreasonably, this should be our starting point - both in terms of laws and also, what football expects. We can justifiably add extra levels of certainty, including "does at least one team think this is a foul?" to be required before blowing, but that's different from changing what is/isn't a foul.
Give the same fouls you always do - just be really sure you're not the only person on the field that has seen it as a foul when the result will be a PK.
They do, as do managers, but they don't expect a penalty to be given against them for the exact same challenge in their own penalty area. We see it week in week out with managers in interviews bemoaning a penalty given against one when they were demanding one for a near identical offence the week before. Call it what you like, self interest, hypocrisy, etc, but it certainly happens.
Most referees at senior levels, and I mean L3 and above, won't even entertain giving a penalty if there is no appeal. That in itself is no kind of yardstick as we know that players appeal for everything, but it is a starting point. I'm perfectly happy giving a free kick in a safe area if I'm only 80% sure it is correct, move that into the penalty area and I must be 100% certain, I need to have seen it very clearly and have zero doubt at all that it is a penalty. I had a game earlier this season where there was a massive penalty appeal that I waved away, and the attacking team were very quick to tell me I was wrong. After the game the captain said "you got that right ref, it wasn't a penalty but you can't blame me for trying".
One trick I got taught was to say to attacking players when there is a penalty appeal "no chance, what would you be saying if I gave that in your area". Doesn't always work, and very spectacularly backfired on one occasion, but more often than not they respond well.