"Safe" sign

[Ref Flunkie]

Am I just late to the party on this one? I am watching the NYRB-CC game with Stott and he is using the "safe" sign a good amount to signal no foul. I was also watching an EPL game today where the referee there was doing the same thing. Personally, I have always been an advocate for communicative signals, but I've always been under the impression that anything outside of the standard pointing is frowned upon. Is this starting to makes it's way into the "accepted" signals? Or was this discussed in the past and I just missed it?

[Alberto]

There hasn't, but I personally like and use the safe sign to indicate there was no foul.

[mw26]

I prefer the "get up" motion when someone spills.

[Ref Flunkie]

I prefer the "get up" motion when someone spills.

I use this if someone went down too "easily". Of course, during a short course, a National Instructor said we should NEVER use the "get up" sign, but I see upper levels using it all the time, so whatever.

[Englishref]

What exactly is the 'safe' sign? Do you mean (what we colloquially call) the grasscutting motion, where both arms are crossed in front of your body, then moved out to form a 'wide' cricket signal? :confused:

(If that made any sense at all :p )

[Ref Flunkie]

What exactly is the 'safe' sign? Do you mean (what we colloquially call) the grasscutting motion, where both arms are crossed in front of your body, then moved out to form a 'wide' cricket signal? :confused:

(If that made any sense at all :p )


I believe yes. The "safe" sign is from baseball. Also what you see people do when they are stretching out their shoulders.

[mw26]

I use this if someone went down too "easily". Of course, during a short course, a National Instructor said we should NEVER use the "get up" sign, but I see upper levels using it all the time, so whatever.

Well, I watch maybe 5 MLS matches a year. All my habits come from English and occaisionally Mexican referees. I see that a lot with those guys.

[Ref Flunkie]

Well, I watch maybe 5 MLS matches a year. All my habits come from English and occaisionally Mexican referees. I see that a lot with those guys.

Totally agree. At the WC, we saw it all the time. I just wonder if FIFA (as both the refs I saw use this yesterday were FIFA referees) is starting to push the "safe" sign where there is no obvious "foulee" or "fouler", but instead an instance where people may be thinking "Was there a foul somewhere in there??".

[USSF REF]

http://www.nyba.ca/images/UmpireSafeGif2.gif

"SAFE!"

To our English friend - this is baseball's "safe" signal. You did figure it out on your own though. An extra tid bit for you - being safe is the opposite from being out. Of course, if you're out the umprire automatically decides it, the defender's don't have to ask the umpire "howzzat?!" or it is "how's that?" I don't know cricket that well.

[socref79]

I see too many referees giving "advantage - play on" for "no foul". Maybe we should have a signal to acknowledge that we saw a play and determined that no foul occurred...it may decrease the amount of time appealing for a call.

[NHRef]

I see too many referees giving "advantage - play on" for "no foul". Maybe we should have a signal to acknowledge that we saw a play and determined that no foul occurred...it may decrease the amount of time appealing for a call.

While there is no signal, you can, and probably should to avoid apeals, say "clean tackle", or "no foul, keep playing" etc.

[SoccerScottWV]

At least in club level matches, it is most common for a ref to say "play on" rather than any hand signal(at least with refs in West Virginia). With my limited experience with Ohio refs, they simply don't acknowledge an incident that was not a foul.

Scott

[intechpc]

At least in club level matches, it is most common for a ref to say "play on" rather than any hand signal(at least with refs in West Virginia). With my limited experience with Ohio refs, they simply don't acknowledge an incident that was not a foul.

Scott

This is one of my worst pet peeves as a referee. I've worked long and hard to break the certain referees in our league of this habit. The term "Play-On" has a specific connotation and should only be used for such (I'm not trying to shoot the messenger here so don't take it that way please).

However, I do like to see referees acknowledge a close non-call. Personally I think it goes a long way in terms of game management. Usually I'll use verbals to make my point but I too have on occasion used the "safe" sign for this.

[ref47]

i, too, try to get the refs i am working with to use the correct language and not help perpetuate the myths. guy i was with sat. blows and calls out, "high kick". we discussed it later and he agreed, dangerous play is the appropriate call and verbalization, if anything needs to be said.

[markland57]

It seems to me that I've seen this signal used when the ball goes into the goal and a foul by the attacking team will prevent the awarding of a goal. It is typically followed by the referee having, sprinted to the location of the foul, poiting to indicate a free kick for th edefending team.

I think it's a good signal that helps to quickly settle players on the field and get them thinking about the retart of play.

[Chiller15J]

I've seen reffs in the EPL and Serie A that stick one arm out, almost like how you would signal advantage, but only one arm. They do this when there could have been a foul. Is this their version of the "no foul/safe" signal? or would they be telling the player to get up, I just can't tell which it is. Any one know?

[USSF REF]

I've seen reffs in the EPL and Serie A that stick one arm out, almost like how you would signal advantage, but only one arm. They do this when there could have been a foul. Is this their version of the "no foul/safe" signal? or would they be telling the player to get up, I just can't tell which it is. Any one know?


I always thought they were pointing at the ball when they did this as if to say "he got all ball".