Mmm, so much fun in that video. FRD, possible YC on thrower (I wouldn't call it), unprofessional referee standing over player and touching him, second FRD!, and is that a parry I spy at the end!?
I know what you guys are saying about him not being 2 meters from the spot. I'm just looking at it from another angle. We generally allow more than one meter from the spot to take the throw-in. On free kicks we allow players to stay less than 10 yards from the spot and do not stop play or caution if the ball is played and intercepted from a free kick. However in this situation where the kid did not move toward the ball or the player, a lot of you reach straight for yellow.
yup, there's at least one long thread on that one. Careful with that statement -- nothing dictates that defenders be two yards from touch, only two yards from where the throw is being taken. (Yes, I know it is not a relevant distinction on this play, but wouldn't want anyone taking away the literal language here and creating a myth from it -- being that close to touch on throws down the line is completely appropriate.) Precisely -- be proactive. I agree you want more clues here. But I'm not necessarily convinced this was not a case of the player taking the throw figuring yeah-go-ahead-and-stand-there-and-watch-what-happens -- game context could help quite a bit. If it still hit him . . . and it would have easier to discern the culpability of the thrower.
So you are in favor of rewarding FRD. I'm not. It disrupts the right of teams trying to play creatively.
One, many of us are actually saying you should shoo the player away before the throw rather than letting it get that far in order to avoid the problem. Two, consider what the defender is actually doing. It is not the equivalent of setting up at 7 yards; it's the equivalent of standing on top of the ball -- a cynical act deliberately intended to disrupt the legitimate activity of the opponent to restart play.
No, I am actually very proactive about players that stand too close on FK's. I'm just trying to play Devil's advocate here. On another note, Social makes a great point that the player is not required to stand 2 meters from the touch line but actually 2 meters from the throw in spot. Again playing Devil's advocate here, the kid is actually more that 2 meters from the thrower when the thrower makes his approach. I apologize for not making that clearer in my posts. The Devil's advocate part.
Think about that -- if the throw is taken three meters away from the touchline, can the defender take position off the pitch (2-meters from the thrower)? Or am I misunderstanding your, er, position on this?
No this is not what I'm saying, a player must have permission to leave the field of play, except in certain circumstances. What I'm saying is that we give leeway of where we spot the place of a throw in by quite a few meters, even though the law only allows 1 meter. Why can we not afford the same leeway for defense as we do for offence. I'm sure we can all agree that the referee failed to prevent this situation from occurring.
The only reason to allow leeway about the spot for the taker is that it can be (is usually) considered trifling, not sure I see any argument that preventing a throw-in (by illegal means) should be considered trifling.
The throw-in is where the ball leaves the thrower's hands, not where he starts his approach from. That the defender was 2 yards from an irrelevant point is irrelevant.
So.... the proactive referee: - backs up the defender so he is 2 yards from the touch line (finer points above aside) This still happens, now what? Defender did nothing "wrong" And a good ref, seeing how the players are setting up will be far from that incident, AR is down the touch line with 2TLD, so nobody is near the incident.
When the thrower is running up to the touch line (and even doing a flip), how is the defender supposed to know where the throw will take place?
If the thrower is doing a flip throw, he's not liketly to be throwing it down the touch line but into the field. That means he's running towards the touchline . . . that just might be where he is going to throw it from! (Not to mention that the only reason in this scenario that the defender is anywhere near the touchline is because he is deliberately trying to get in the way of the throw, suggests tha the player is pretty good at figuring out where the throw is going to come from . . . and he's probably moving to track the spot as the thrower comes in . . . .)
You reminded me of another reason you can tell the defender is likely interested in interfering with the throw-in: Everyone else is setup at the drop zone and you have one lone wolf standing there. Hint! But to answer your question, once you've backed the player up there isn't anything you can or should be necessarily doing to prevent this. When it happens, you have to judge the temperature of the match, possibly the history with the two players and all the info you have to decide what you want to do (options include nothing or deciding it was striking and misconduct). My answer was laid out before -- I think this is a "do nothing" from what I can see in the video. Call the trainer on, get the kid off to be checked and restart with a dropped ball (conversely, I suppose you could just have a TI if the ball ended up going back into touch, can't remember if it did). I would also argue that even if the AR or CR are not near the incident, someone needs to be watching this. First, for the legitimate concern that the thrower violates the Law in some way and because of my "hint" above that a player is standing close. Normally I would care less about the throw but when you are launching the ball as far as a CK goes, my trifling bar goes down.
I'd say that a crew that is good enough to see the potential issue would be best served by leaving the AR close by (if possible). If it gets messy he's there and if it doesn't he should have enough time to get in position for when he's needed (subsequent offside or GL).
I don't think having the AR away for the OS line is a practical solution here. Just like a FK played into the PA, the long throw creates the possibility of an almost instant OS situation for which the AR would have no chance of getting back. (I also think if the R sees what is happening and slows things down, the potentail explosiveness of the situation has dropped dramtically.)
Possibly, depends a bit on angles and distances. At least he could know to be focused on the throw-in area.
For the video of the throw hitting the defender, one thing to consider is whether you could consider the thrower's actions careless or reckless. Yes, the defending player is standing too close (although some have said that this video predates the change), but look at the release point of the thrower - he is in a tight crouch / ball and the release point is at the defender's waist level. The thrower knows that the defender is right there. At a minimum his actions can be considered careless - that is he is acting without care for the impact of his actions on other players. The defender's position does not negate the thrower's responsibility to act with care. Change the restart to a situation where you have a free kick and the defender stops and seeks to delay the restart to allow his team to recover into a defensive position. What do you do if the attacker just runs up and blasts the ball into the defender? My whole point is that we need to be congnizant that just because the defender is wrong, doesn't mean that we shouldn't be alert to or aware of possible infractions or problems with what the other player did.
Two meters is about 6 and half feet. The thrower could finish his throw, and fall completely forward, and, unless he is Peter Crouch, won't even reach the defender's feet. EDIT: Was there some sort of close call collision in the video? I see a lot of people referring to a specific incident where the thrower would be doing something dangerous to an attacker. I saw no such thing in that video, though. I'll assume it's a typical case of devil's-advocate-gone-too-far that we know and love so much on this forum
Just noticed something: At 2:25 it looks like the player scores directly from a throw-in and it looks like the referee acknowledges the goal. Unless I'm missing something that goal should have been dissallowed.
The referee has a much better angle than the camera. I assume there was a second touch somewhere on the way into the goal.
I wouldn't touch careless with a 10' pole. I see where you're going, but I don't think that is the bests analysis. ATR 15.8 advises to evaluate as either USB or VC -- I agree that is the standard that makes the most sense: if there is anything that warrants the a sanction on the thrower, it is worthy of a caution. (When I watch this, I think the thrower is saying "you're gonna stand there? Well, you're gonna pay for it!" and deserves a card -- but I'm not confident in that evaluation from the cold video.)
Caution the defender for not respecting the distance, send off thrower for serious foul play - once the ball crosses the touchline, it is in play, so it can't be VC - to me, it's the same as the slide tackle to knock the ball away, but the foot comes up and nails the opponent in the knee - he probably didn't intend to nail the opponent, but he did - same with this throw in.