Should the players be allowed to ask for Free kicks in lieu of advantage play on ?

[vilafria]

In today's Uefa cup match between Middlesboro vs Basel I noticed that the ref allowed for "advantage" play by the fouled team , Boro in a central position just outside of the 18 yard box.
Even the GolTV commentator mentioned that the ref should have called for the free kick. Basel were defending the result and had several men behind the ball. Boro lost the ball almost immediatelly.
It just made me wonder in a situation like this, if the ref is not keen on calling for the FK just because the Boro player was in possession of the ball after being fouled, shouldn't that same player or even a teammate be allowed to ask the ref for the FK instead ?

[bluedevils]

In today's Uefa cup match between Middlesboro vs Basel I noticed that the ref allowed for "advantage" play by the fouled team , Boro in a central position just outside of the 18 yard box.
Even the GolTV commentator mentioned that the ref should have called for the free kick. Basel were defending the result and had several men behind the ball. Boro lost the ball almost immediatelly.
It just made me wonder in a situation like this, if the ref is not keen on calling for the FK just because the Boro player was in possession of the ball after being fouled, shouldn't that same player or even a teammate be allowed to ask the ref for the FK instead ?

I agree with your idea, but from the description of that situation it is not a good example.

Too often, you see referees indicate advantage when the team is getting no such advantage by continuing play. The advantage in many cases is to get the FK. In the situation you described, the players should not have had to ask for the FK; it should have been awarded.

All that said, I do think it is reasonable for players to indicate to the referee their preference for the FK or their preference for the referee applying advantage or being slow on the whistle to allow the player more time to fight through a challenge.

Skilled referees are already making these sorts of determinations on their own. You develop a feel for which types of players, and in a particular match, which specific players are better off getting the FK and which ones are better off with the advantage signal. I see no problem with having a different standard for different players.

Being willing to accept polite input from the players can only help the referee make better decisions in these types of situations.

For example, let's say a player is heading down the middle of the field and is about 25 yards out when he is tripped by the defender. There's 1 more defender providing cover. The attacker stumbles and appears that he can regain his footing and take on the 1 remaining defender for a nice 1v1 opportunity heading into the penalty area. This is a pretty good scoring opportunity.

Now say the attacker is a very skilled dribbler and goalscorer. A smart referee might think it wise to signal advantage and give the attacker a chance to recover from the attempted trip and take on the last defender.

Now, instead say the attacker is actually a big strong center back who has no business being in front of goal with the ball at his feet. If he is tripped in a similar fashion, the player and his team are probably much better off with the FK because the advantage opportunity is much less appealing.

One thing about the 'asking' from the players. We can't have players getting fouled and turning to the ref and asking for the foul. That won't work. Players need to communicate this information at an appropriate time. Perhaps after a sequence has unfolded and ball is out of play, the player can tell the ref, 'next time I would rather have that FK.' Or, if the ref called the FK, the player may say (not always so nicely, depending on how juicy the advantage opportunity), 'hey, let me keep going - I would have gotten past that guy.'

Often times, I will actually ask the players which they would prefer. I try to make my best judgement, but asking is even better than guessing.

It's late as I type this; I hope it makes sense.

[vilafria]

I agree with your idea, but from the description of that situation it is not a good example.

Too often, you see referees indicate advantage when the team is getting no such advantage by continuing play. The advantage in many cases is to get the FK. In the situation you described, the players should not have had to ask for the FK; it should have been awarded.

All that said, I do think it is reasonable for players to indicate to the referee their preference for the FK or their preference for the referee applying advantage or being slow on the whistle to allow the player more time to fight through a challenge.

Skilled referees are already making these sorts of determinations on their own. You develop a feel for which types of players, and in a particular match, which specific players are better off getting the FK and which ones are better off with the advantage signal. I see no problem with having a different standard for different players.

Being willing to accept polite input from the players can only help the referee make better decisions in these types of situations.

For example, let's say a player is heading down the middle of the field and is about 25 yards out when he is tripped by the defender. There's 1 more defender providing cover. The attacker stumbles and appears that he can regain his footing and take on the 1 remaining defender for a nice 1v1 opportunity heading into the penalty area. This is a pretty good scoring opportunity.

Now say the attacker is a very skilled dribbler and goalscorer. A smart referee might think it wise to signal advantage and give the attacker a chance to recover from the attempted trip and take on the last defender.

Now, instead say the attacker is actually a big strong center back who has no business being in front of goal with the ball at his feet. If he is tripped in a similar fashion, the player and his team are probably much better off with the FK because the advantage opportunity is much less appealing.

One thing about the 'asking' from the players. We can't have players getting fouled and turning to the ref and asking for the foul. That won't work. Players need to communicate this information at an appropriate time. Perhaps after a sequence has unfolded and ball is out of play, the player can tell the ref, 'next time I would rather have that FK.' Or, if the ref called the FK, the player may say (not always so nicely, depending on how juicy the advantage opportunity), 'hey, let me keep going - I would have gotten past that guy.'

Often times, I will actually ask the players which they would prefer. I try to make my best judgement, but asking is even better than guessing.

It's late as I type this; I hope it makes sense.

Yes ,it does.
I also meant to say that the "asking" should be polite, and , if I wasn't clear on my original post, only after the ref had indicated "play on".

[blech]

Yes ,it does.
I also meant to say that the "asking" should be polite, and , if I wasn't clear on my original post, only after the ref had indicated "play on".

one way to "asK" is to go down on the contact and make it clear no advantage has materialized :)

seriously, it is an interesting notion, but it seems somewhat impractical. ref sees foul. waits to see if advantage situation exists. signals. players raises hand to indicate they decline advantage. ref whistles.

if player isn't indicating right away that they'd rather have the kick, then ref has to read it and make his/her own decision. and, then, you end up with players asking for the kick and the ref responding that there was no foul. again, interesting notion, but it's going to be a big mess. unlike US football, where a team can choose to accept or decline the penalty, the constant flow of a soccer game doesn't lend itself to anything like this.

[bluedevils]

I'll let Vilafria answer for himself. For me, I am talking more about finding out from each player what their general preference is, not trying to find out on a foul-by-foul basis. The latter is obviously impractical as blech said. The ref can make those determinations on his own of general preference per player, and feedback throughout a match or maybe even before or after a match can help to refine the ref's information.

[Wreave]

Didn't Michele Akers get on a ref for calling a foul in a game once? "When I want the foul called, I'll fall down!"

[vilafria]

Didn't Michele Akers get on a ref for calling a foul in a game once? "When I want the foul called, I'll fall down!"
:) .I haven't heard that one.
In the example given, the foul happened in the center area and the ball spilt on to a free Boro player. In my view and also the GolTV commentators there was no advantage in the play-on signaled by ref. With so many Basel defenders back the obvious choice was a FK.
My point is that , as I believe is allowed in rugby, the player from the fouled team can ask for the "penalty" in lieu of advantage play-on .
I realize time is much bigger factor in soccer and the difficulty in on the spot
judgement by both the ref and the players of the fouled team in coming up with a decision in a "choice allowed" soccer game, but it would also increase the possibilities for tactical game development.

[Doug the Ref]

Interesting comments. I do wonder, how often we allow the play to continue and invoke advantage? I sometimes critique myself and think I allow play to continue sometimes more than I should. I like to let the play go on, but if the victim just stops and wonders why I did not call a foul there ...? I know we verbalize the play-on, but some players just don't get it.

[macheath]

Didn't Michele Akers get on a ref for calling a foul in a game once? "When I want the foul called, I'll fall down!"

I always heard it attributed to Mia Hamm. It's a good one either way.